






















PAV Pee oe: 
mu Mh ay 
Rr denne 
ae. ; 


; i » 


A AEM Os tase ve 
' hy sae) 
bar? Oia tary, | 
ee 

a ; 


J ie) ht ds 
ae as a { 
a fh 


¢ \ 
} ye \ 
The Abingdon Religious Education Texts > | 
Paid G. Wowney, General Editor’. me Wed 
COLLEGE SERIES GEORGE HERBERT BETTS, 1 Bditor? al 


The Ethical Teaching of 
the Gospels 


By 
ERNEST WARD BURCH 


Assistant Professor of New Testament In- 
terpretation in Garrett Biblical Institute 





} 


iin 


THE ABINGDON PRESS 
NEW YORK CINCINNATI 


Copyright, 1925, by 
ERNEST WARD BURCH 


All rights reserved, including that of translation into foreign 
languages, including the Scandinavian 


Printed in the United States of America 


TO MY WIFE 
HARRIET SQUIRE BURCH 


Timed 


ea st 
Py 4 i 1 





CONTENTS 


CHAPTER I 


THE HISTORICAL APPROACH TO THE ETHICAL 
TEACHING OF JESUS 


PAGE 
JESUSIA) LBACHERIQE IGTHIGS Ghia OG ben Giles kl an aula ty 13 
THE HisToricAL APPROACH THROUGH FHE SEVERAL GOSPELS... 15 
ACHR PROBLEM Ue d bw cele alo Sadana a el yada 15 

CHAPTER II 

THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK 
ANALYSIS OF THE DISCOURSE ELEMENT IN MARK........... 18 
TEACHING OF JESUS IN MARK ADDRESSED TO THE TWELVE... 21! 
POPULAR: ADDRESSES AND' PABABEES V0 0) so) cag oss aid Gatco ales ele 42 
Worps ADDRESSED TO CONTEMPORARY RELIGIOUS LEADERS.. 55 
DHS APOCALYPSE IN MARE? D3 cic ic aed cdl UO ual alg 61 
THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN THE SECOND GOSPEL............. 65 
ETHICAL VALUES WITHIN THE NEW BROTHERHOOD.......... 70 


CHAPTER III 
THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 


MATTHEW 
ANALYSIS OF THE DISCOURSE ELEMENT IN MATTHEW....... 76 
OUTLINE OF THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT.................. 80 
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: CHARACTER AND FUNCTION OF 
THOSE WHO QUALIFY FOR THE NEW ORDER............. 88 
THE SERMON ON THE MounNT: RIGHT-NESS THAT SURPASSES 
THAT OF THE CONTEMPORARY SYNAGOGUE TEACHING..... 93 
THE SERMON ON THE Mount: SociAL EVIDENCES OF THE 
Pb Ades. ai ml Ee) bP SIA abit io LL RR SINE RI SU te aN PT es Yih SUS ged Ik Maker 101 
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: RECIPROCITY WITHIN THE 
Wew: Onper} OTHER PRACTICAL) TESTS oo. h eel 109 
SUMMARY OF THE ETHICAL CONTENT OF THE SERMON ON THE 
De) weg Wene MRA UN aie hg MIME NIELS Ry Wie RTL AN a en BLU, OR No 116 
THE NORMATIVE POWER OF THE INNER LIFE............... 120 
THE BROTHERHOOD OF THE KINGDOM: ITs MUTUAL ETHICAL 
PEMA THING Re re Lato te pean eat A RAD Udi get ce eietalermou te 124 
- THE NATIONALISM OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.............+.0-. 129 
ETHICS AND RELIGION: A STUDY OF THE RULING CLASSES IN 
Pe TETREMME UP rRes AiO bl Cita ts nth ate Aaa a hss pte Rik ls teba-wow eee hae oe} 135 


THE ETHICS OF THE FAMILY IN THE First GOSPEL.......... 141 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


PAGE 

REWARD IN THE FirsT GOSPEL AS A SANCTION OF MORAL 
ENDEAVORS Ca eos ernie a tae Geechee ie rane teu ci 146 
THE MATTH2ZAN CONCEPTION OF THE REIGN OF GOD........ 150 


CHAPTER IV 
THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE 


Discourse OF JEsuS IN LUKE; Tuts EVANGELIsT’s UNIQUE 


CONTRIBUTION OF ETHICAL TEACHING.................- 160 
THE SERMON ON THE PLAIN: JESUS’ LAW oF SocIAL AmITy, 
ACCORDING TOT LURE GUS A SRR WRAL ORS 0s me rae 164 
ETHICS AND CONVENTIONALITY: JESUS’ TREATMENT OF THE 
SOCTALIZV NRT ia inl VaUiias, ha Aik amt Oe eve tuL eae Ved mins 169 
HES TCTMICS OF /PROPAGANDA! SoS BRET Cr aad a tena, Wap Me 173 
THE ETHICS OF MATERIAL POSSESSIONS: LUKE AND THE 
OTHER (SYNOPTIC UW RITERS Sou Mae Be een en Geen 177 
THE ETHICS OF THE PAMINIG Gy a UI ee Olouaal 5 Raion weep 183 
THE VIEW OF THE THIRD EVANGELIST CONCEENIG THE 
REIGN (OF) GOD bs) Ghacid Se Rit bee pak oaketiele 6 Paeiptes 188 
CHAPTER V 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN 


THE FourTH GOSPEL CONSIDERED AS A SOURCE OF ETHICAL 


CL SACHIN Gig) 2) 6c sah ited rere a eAMEty aI staal Go gare Ve Oana eae 193 
SOCIAL CONTACTS OF JESUS IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL......... 196 
THE JOHANNINE WAY OF EXPRESSING THE MORAL THOUGHT 

AND "PROGRAM OF JESUS a Wibaay SU thts stew we tne yell are 200 
THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN THE FouRTH GOSPEL............. 207 

CHAPTER VI 
THE ETHICS OF THE OrEeUS AND THE ETHICS OF 


THE PROBLEM OF IDENTIFYING THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF 
Jesus WHEN ONLY SECONDARY SOURCES ARE AT HAND... 214 


THE SAVINGS! OR (JESUS iin sani Vic ioeclears Sheen tba d dee cme aeeee 219 
THE EVANGELISTS AND THE WORDS OF JESUS............... 228 
‘THE: PTRICAL ‘LEACHING, OF TESUG i iii» cilnu sedis ola ciel teen 233 


A SELECTED LIST OF BOOKS SUGGESTED FOR 
COLLATERAL READING 


I. THE SOURCES 


Burton and Goodspeed: 
Ernest DeWitt Burton: 
Doremus Almy Hayes: 


Maurice Jones: 
Gustav Dalman: 
F. Crawford Burkitt: 


A. Huck: 


i 


Hinckley G. Mitchell: 
John M. P. Smith: 
Thomas Walker: 
Robert Henry Charles: 


Edward Chisholm Dewick: 


A Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels. 

The Teaching of Jesus: A Source Book. 

a Synoptic Gospels and the Book of 

cts. 

The Four Gospels. 

The Words of Jesus. 

The Gospel History and Its Transmis- 
sion. 

Synopsis of the First Three Gospels. 


BACKGROUND 


The Ethics of the Old Testament. 

The Moral Life of the Hebrews. 

The Teaching of Jesus and the Jewish 
Teaching of His Age. 

Religious Development Beiween the Old 
Testament and the New Testament. 

Primitive Christian Eschatology. 


III. THe TEACHING OF JESUS 


Heinrich H. Wendt: 
Alexander B. Bruce: 
Edward I. Bosworth: 
Henry Churchill King: 
Ernest Findlay Scott: 
J. Alexander Findlay: 
Henry Clay Vedder: 
Samuel Dickey: 


The Teaching of Jesus. 

The Kingdom of God. 

The Life and Teaching of Jesus. 
The Ethics of Jesus. 

The Ethical Teaching of Jesus. 

The Realism of Jesus. 

The Fundamentals of Christianity. 
The Constructive Revolution of Jesus. 


IV. PRESENT PROBLEMS 


Walter Rauschenbusch: 


Shailer Mathews: 
Charles Abram Ellwood: 


Christianizing the Social Order. 
The Social Principles of Jesus. 
The Church and the Changing Order. 
The Reconstruction of Religion. 
Christianity and Social Science. 


Palate 


iy 


« 
¥ 





PREFACE 


Tus text book deals with one portion of the con- 
tents of the New Testament. Its field is purposely 
restricted to the ethical teaching found in the Four 
Gospels, that is, the moral instruction or appeal 
ascribed by the gospel writers to Jesus of Nazareth. 

Included under the term “ethical teaching” are 
all those precepts which have as their aim the 
ennobling of human experience and the development 
of personal character. Likewise all that is clearly 
designed to teach men how to live together and how 
best to develop those bonds of social amity which 
furnish high satisfaction in the community life is 
ethical in character. The term properly includes 
all that is proposed for the establishment and regu- 
lation of family life, all that embraces the manifold 
social relations of the individual and of various 
groups, large and small, whether within racial and 
national boundaries or outside such limits. All 
that involves human behavior in its motives, its 
influence, its social significance, and all that treats 
of human values, in terms of person and character, 
is ethical in nature. 

The word ‘“‘moral’’ is here considered synonymous 
with “‘ethical’’ and the two words are used in the 
same sense throughout the book. 

Some of the teaching ascribed to Jesus is more 
distinctly religious in character. Some teaching 
in the Gospels may merit even the term ‘‘theo- 
logical.”” Such portions as those in which Jesus 
illustrates the providential care of the Father for 
his children are so simple yet so sublime as to surpass 


9 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


much teaching clothed in more profound terms. 
The faith of Jesus is at once the most childlike and 
the most potent. The person of Jesus stands out 
clearly from the gospel page as that of One who in 
a real sense is more than human, for the modern 
reader of the Gospels experiences the compelling 
force of ages of worship and adoration of Jesus 
Christ behind the intrinsic power of his words. 

To other volumes, however, must be entrusted 
the exposition of Jesus’ teaching about God and 
religion as such, and discussion of the person of 
Christ must await another time. These themes are 
weighty and pressing, but in this study are neces- 
sarily omitted. 

Throughout the following pages Jesus is thought 
of primarily as the Teacher of men, certain Jewish 
men whom he trained and sent out to carry his 
ringing message to others. They heralded the 
approach of a new moral order in which shepherdless 
sheep would be cared for, in which selfish exploi- 
tation of men would give place to unselfish fraternal 
cooperation, in which men should indeed become 
sons of the Father. } 

This restriction of viewpoint and material is made 
in the interest of clear exposition of the moral 
thought of Jesus, but the observance of this restric- 
tion may not be assumed by the student to reflect 
any actual limitation of Jesus himself in the mind 
of the writer. 

It is earnestly hoped that the method here used 
will greatly stimulate first-hand study of the Gospels, 
for in no other way can the student hope to gain 
any real mastery of the thought of Jesus and his 
immediate followers. 


Io 


PREFACE 


Among the research questions scattered through 
the text there are some which encourage the student 
to make a modern application of the gospel teaching. 
The text itself, however, is not committed to any 
such attempt. Attention is focussed upon the 
meaning of the evangelist. 

Few references to modern works upon the teaching 
of Jesus will be found in the following pages, while 
many references to the Gospels are offered. The 
writer owes a great debt of gratitude to all his pre- 
decessors in this field, and gratefully acknowledges 
that indebtedness. In the preparation of this 
textbook, however, a serious attempt has been 
made to deal chiefly with the Gospels in Greek and 
to avoid the compilation method. 

Both translation and paraphrase have been used 
in giving the content of shorter or longer passages. 
For these renderings the writer assumes all the 
responsibility. They are offered not so much as 
examples of fine literary expression as of plain 
statement of the meaning which the Greek words 
probably presented to their first readers. 

If the book shall prove useful in its intended 
field and if it shall in any way make clearer to 
students of the Gospel the intensely social message 
of Jesus to his times, to that extent the hopes which 
go with its publication will be fulfilled. 

ERNEST WARD BURCH. 

Garrett Biblical Institute, Evanston, Illinois. 


It 





CHAPTER I 


THE HISTORICAL APPROACH TO THE 
ETHICAL TEACHING OF JESUS 


Jesus A TEACHER OF ETHICS 


Jesus of Nazareth was a teacher of ethics. He 
was reared within the Jewish church, whose teachers 
very earnestly considered problems of conduct, as 
their wisdom literature abundantly testifies. In 
the course of his Bible instruction Jesus doubtless 
became familiar with the contents of books both 
within and without the Old Testament, many of 
which contained fine ethical traditions. By no 
means the least of these books of morals were those 
that bore the names of the so-called ‘‘ethical 
prophets,” Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah, from 
the eighth and seventh centuries before his time. 

Jesus was more than a teacher of morals. He 
was a moral leader. Men who committed his 
teaching to writing and at the same time revealed 
their impressions of his personality assure their 
readers that the man was indeed the message. He 
taught in terms that are clear and crystal-like, he 
had insight that appealed to his companions as 
unfailing, and his spirit was charmingly frank and 
sincere. He did not stand aloof from men and 
their daily toil but himself met every typical human 
experience. He challenged the loyalty of those 
whom he called, he mystified some who stood high 
in the councils of his people, he sometimes terrified 
- those who loved him best by the majesty of his 
presence and the power of his word, yet all knew 


13 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the Teacher as a man among men and as one who 
somehow possessed the inherent right to lead them. 
By some he was supposed to be a revolutionist, by 
others he was known to be a_ builder of character; 
by some he was persecuted but by most he was 
loved. His teaching was new in that it focussed a 
bright light upon many a forgotten truth; it was 
old in that it affirmed the age-old truth of the law 
and the prophets in their noble moral insight. The 
Master was thus an illustration of his own saying: 
“Every scribe who has been made a disciple in the 
kingdom of heaven is like a householder who pro- 
duces from his treasure store new things and old.” 

Jesus was not only a moral leader for his times, 
he was a teacher of all who aspire in any time to 
become moral teachers or leaders. His teaching, 
imbedded in the Four Gospels, possesses a high 
degree of interest for all who feel the need of social 
redemption now. For the moral thought and 
teaching of Jesus, more than that of any other, when 
clearly understood, will make social redemption 
possible. 

The student’s approach to Jesus the Teacher is 
through the pages of the Gospels, no word of which 
was written by the Master himself. The approved 
method of study is the historical. To listen to the 
voice of Jesus through the atmosphere of creed or 
dogma is to risk much of its clearness of tone. To 
follow tradition alone is to risk the substitution of 
theological or ecclesiastical bias for the naive and, 
on the whole, very plain statements of Jesus’ sym- 
pathetic friends. 


1 Matt. 13. 52. 
14 


ETHICAL TEACHING OF JESUS 


THE HistoricaL APPROACH 


The historical procedure is to go directly to the 
words of the evangelists Mark, Matthew, Luke, and 
John, studying each one inductively, estimating 
each one’s understanding of the moral message of 
Jesus, then putting together the results of that 
study. This book is entitled The Ethical Teaching 
of the Gospels because the contribution of each and 
all the Gospels must be made before the ethics of 
Jesus can be formulated. Each Gospel stands for 
itself, yet all the Gospels stand together. Each 
evangelist writes for his own circle of readers, yet 
historically tested, as all the Gospels have been, 
they are found to present a coherent and sym- 
metrical account of the man of Nazareth and his 
message. 


THE CHIEF PROBLEMS 


The chief problems to be encountered will be those 
of analysis and interpretation. It is not desirable 
to occupy the student’s attention with the details 
of synoptic criticism, nor even with many points of 
special introduction. Without asking at present 
about the literary history of the Gospels, each one 
of the four is to be considered as a unitary work, 
presenting in its finished form a certain view of the 
ethical message imparted to the first disciples and 
kept alive somehow until the day when the gospel 
writer sent it from his hand to his first readers. 

The several writings involved came from widely 
separated places, from Rome and from Ephesus, 
from Syria and from Macedonia. Their times also 
varied from the seventh to the tenth decade of the 
first century. One who reads the Gospels induc- 


T5 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


tively lets the writer say what he will, and does not 
import into: the Oriental, first-century work any 
Western, modern thought. The student will assume 
that the developing thought of the early church may 
be reflected in the several Gospels, which will then 
offer different points of view and varying degrees of 
emphasis upon certain teaching. The historical 
method will allow even for discrepancies, although 
it never creates discrepancies. 

Summarizing what has been said, an inductive 
study of each of the Gospels will result in a detailed 
statement of Jesus’ ethical teaching as it was under- 
stood by these men, who were not all eyewitnesses of 
his ministry on earth. Each evangelist is most 
probably to be regarded as setting forth the Christian 
ethics of his time and of his own church. But in 
any case the ethical teaching of Jesus is the founda- 
tion of such Christian ethics and can, to a high 
degree of certainty, be derived from the later teach- 
ing, that is, the ethical teaching of the Gospel 
writer himself. 

At the close of the study’ the relation of the evan- 
gelists’ teaching to that of Jesus will be traced by 
means of well-established literary historical prin- 
ciples. This synthesis will reveal to what extent 
the ethics of the Gospels is really the ethical teaching 
of Jesus. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What is the nature of the study known as “‘ethics’’? 
2. How far into the past can one trace the history of 
ethical study? 


2 Chapter VI, pp. 214ff. 
16 


ETHICAL TEACHING OF JESUS 


. What claim has Jesus, as a teacher of ethics, upon 
the interest of a college student? 

. Discover and report upon the titles and the nature 
of two or three Jewish writings that deal with moral 
truth and which probably were available in Jesus’ 
day. Are any such works found outside the Bible? 
. What is New Testament Introduction? 

. Report upon the usually accepted dates for the Four 
Gospels, noting in case of a difference of opinion 
the earliest and latest proposed dates for each. 

. Indicate the nature of the inductive method in any 
study. | 

. Present in a few paragraphs your statement of the 
literary historical method of approach to the study 
of the Gospels. 


17 


CHAPTER II 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL 
ACCORDING TO MARK 


ANALYSIS OF THE Di1SCOURSE ELEMENT IN 
MARK 


It is frequently assumed by writers in the New 
Testament field that the amount of discourse ma- 
terial in Mark is negligible, apart from the parables 
of the fourth chapter and the apocalypse of the 
thirteenth. To be sure, in a number of places,’ 
the Second Evangelist tells that Jesus taught, omit- 
ting the content of such instruction, but in many 
other places the teaching is set forth in detail. This 
section will contain a statistical survey of such 
teaching in the second Gospel. 

In chapters 4, 12 and 13 the longest sections 
containing words of Jesus are found. Many words 
of the Master in the Gospel are in the nature of 
dialog designed chiefly to carry the story, and there 
are a number of sayings that appear somewhat 
isolated, But when all these are properly appraised 
there remains a significant body of teaching placed 
by the Evangelist upon the lips of Jesus, which 
properly represents the Evangelist’s understanding 
of Jesus’ moral views. 

The Second Gospel contains about 11,270 words.” 
Of these, 4,006 are words of Jesus, of which all but 


1 Mark 1. 21f.; 2. 2c, 13b; 4. 33; 6. 2, 6b, 34; 


dy count is upon the basis of the Greek tae of Westcott and 
Oo 


18 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


eighty-four are direct discourse. In chapter 13 
are found 538 words of Jesus, the balance in direct 
discourse, 3,384, being outside that apocalypse. 

Leaving chapter 13 out of consideration for the 
moment, these 3,384 words of Jesus are distributed 
through the other fifteen chapters of Mark in about 
112 groups, each group containing from one word? 
to 359." 

Such a proportion of words of Jesus introduced 
into the dramatic narrative of Mark shows that the 
evangelist had an interest in setting forth the sub- 
stance of Jesus’ thought as well as the manner of 
his life. It often occurs that after a few words of 
Jesus which serve simply to carry the story (dialog), 
the evangelist introduces some important teaching.* 

The words placed by Mark upon Jesus’ lips that 
serve chiefly to ‘‘carry the story,’ as his part of 
ordinary dialog, excluding strictly “teaching ma-~- 
terial,”’ number about 676 for the entire Gospel, 291 
of these being in chapter 14, sixteen in chapter 13, 
the remaining 369 being found in chapters 1-12, 
inclusive, and 15. | 

Many of Jesus’ words in this Gospel are cast into 
the form of interrogation. Aside from 13.2, the 
apocalyptic chapter contains not a question, but 
within the other chapters there are found sixty- 
two questions upon the lips of Jesus.® This fact 
may be explained by the tendency of the evangel- 
ist thus to express his conception of Jesus’ method. 
It is noticeable that in parallel passages Matthew 

3“Ephphatha,” 7. 34. 

4Explanation of parables, 4. 11-32. 

5Examples are numerous. See Mark 3. 31-35; 8. 17f.; 9. 21, 23; 


10. 3, 5ff.; often in chapter 14. 
®Punction of Westcott and Hort. 


TQ 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


frequently omits the question, often substituting 
statement of fact. 

The use of passages in Mark from the Old Testa- 
ment in Greek offers opportunity for an inquiry as 
to the relative proportion of such quotations. Of 
the 4,006 words of Jesus in the second Gospel, 379 are 
in the form of quotation from the Old Testament.’ 

The student will have noted by this time that 
chapter 13 of the second Gospel offers certain pecu- 
liarities, differentiating it from the rest of the work. 
Its teaching is decidedly of a different sort; it makes 
use of a higher percentage of Old Testament ma- 
terial; only one question is found on Jesus’ lips; 
and further comparative research will show that 
contemporary and earlier Jewish works offer much 
that goes to show the prevalence of an expectation 
of some catastrophe as is here set forth. At a 
later point® this chapter must form the subject of 
study, insofar as it relates to the concept of the 
Reign of God. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 


1. In what other Gospels are to be found parallels to 
Mark 13? State any significant differences that you 
note. 

2. How many parables are found in Mark, and where 
located ° 

3. After reading each parable carefully, give it the most 
descriptive title you can devise. 


7 The evangelist himself in his narrative, and upon the lips of 
others than Jesus, uses 107 additional words from the Old Testa- 
ment. Of the 379 above, 78 Old Testament words of Jesus are in 
chapter 13. Outside chapter 13, 8.6 per cent of Jesus’ words are 
from the Old Testament. Within chapter 13, 12.6 per cent of 
Jesus’ words are from the Old Testament. 

§ Pages 61-64. 


20 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


4. What language did Jesus probably speak? What 
words in this language are found in the second 
Gospel? 

5. Point out instances in Mark where Jesus makes advan- 
tageous use of the question in teaching. 

6. What constituted the Bible of the Christian Church 
at the time of the writing of our Gospel? 

7. What explanation can you offer for the relatively 
large proportion of dialog in chapter 14? 


TEACHING OF JESUS IN MARK ADDRESSED TO 
THE TWELVE 


Within the entire Gospel, Jesus addresses 2,132 
words to the Twelve or to some of the disciples. 
Chapter 13 entire is addressed to disciples, verses 
1f., the introduction, being a conversation with “‘one 
of his disciples,’ verses 3-37 being addressed to 
Peter, James, John, and Andrew. Taking the 
entire Gospel into consideration, about fifty-three 
per cent of Jesus’ words in Mark are addressed to 
the Twelve or to some of their number.? 

Because of the greater importance given to dis- 
ciple instruction on the part of the Second Evangel- 
ist, the ethical material contained in this major 
part of Jesus’ teaching according to Mark should 
first be studied. 

The dialog material already mentioned need 
not be further examined. There are a number of 
passages clearly designed by the evangelist to give 
content to the intimate instruction of those men 
whom Jesus chose, ‘“‘that they might be with him 
and that he might send them out to proclaim (the 


® Without chapter 13, the percentage of Jesus’ words addressed 
to the Twelve or some of their number shrinks to about 47 per cent. 


21 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Kingdom) and to have power to cast out demons.’ 


When the Master had carried the instruction of 
the Twelve to a certain point he sent them out 
upon a mission! involving a proclamation of the 
Reign of God, restoration of the mentally un- 
sound to normal balance, and the teaching of such 
principles of the moral life as Jesus had already 
imparted to them. 3 

In chapter 4 the evangelist sets forth some of the | 
instruction preliminary to this mission, especially, 
verses 3-9, II-20, 21-25. 

The parable of the Different Soils is addressed 
to the “‘multitude,” but verses roff. indicate that 
the parable was explained in private.” In their 
‘mission, and doubtless in later missions, the dis- 
ciples would meet no constant degree of recep- 
tivity in their hearers. Many would fail to hear 
their message. But the recipients of the extensive 
private instruction of Jesus would be inducted into 
the “mysterion” of the Reign of God; that is, 
they were to become familiar with its nature 
and its function in human affairs. The continued 
conversation reveals that not the Twelve alone 
were thus to become familiar with the real meaning 
of the Kingdom or Reign of God, but that all who 
hear with insight shall share in this knowledge." 

The explanation of the parable exhibits deep 
insight into the affairs of human life, which, indeed, 
enter practically into the development or inhibition 


10 Mark 3. 14. 116, 7ff. 

% Mark 4. 10 indicates that others besides the Twelve were 
present. But all are clearly disciples of Jesus. Luke understands 
that at least seventy besides the Twelve were sent on a public mis- 
sion (Luke ro. 1). 

34, Ila. 144.9, 21-25. 


22 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


of the hearing, hence into the rise of that ability 
to hear with insight which characterizes those who 
know the Kingdom. The “fowls of the air,” the 
“stony ground,” “‘the sun,” the “thorns” form a 
background to the picture in the parable which is 
plainly the background of life in its everyday aspect. 

Had the reader access to this passage alone, the 
impression would readily be formed that the Twelve 
were fully aware of the nature of the Kingdom 
even when they went out to proclaim its coming;” 
but other items in the private instruction of the 
disciples show that the death of Jesus intervened 
before their knowledge became clear and uncon- 
fused, for Mark writes from such a later period 
that all early misunderstandings had been made 
plain. 

The above discussion of Jesus’ private explanation 
of his parable is somewhat enlightened by the evan- 
gelist’s statement that this was but one of many 
parables that Jesus used in his public teaching’® 
and that it was the custom of Jesus to speak only 
in parables to the multitude, while to his disciples 
he spoke more intimately in exposition.” But this 
statement of the evangelist is not to be taken to 
mean that Jesus never taught the people in any 
other form. Further study of Mark will reveal 
much that Jesus taught the people directly. 

The second passage of importance to the teaching 
of the Twelve, according to Mark, is 7. 18-23. As 
before, the disciples ask the Master to explain what 
he had just declared in public. Jesus had come into 
conflict with Pharisees over ceremonial defilement. 


16 Mark 6. 7. 14. 2. 74, 33f. 
23 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


They stressed the legal ablutions while Jesus had 
protested that defilement was not from without.* 
The disciples themselves were involved in the veiled 
charge of the Pharisees, hence their anxious ques- 
tion.’ Jesus answered them: 
“Are you too thus without discernment? 
Do you not perceive that everything which 
proceeds into a man from outside is without 
power to defile him; that externals enter not 
into his heart, but into his digestive tract, and 
then pass off as waste?” 


In the evangelist’s view Jesus is here teaching an 
important ethical principle to his friends. The 
contamination to be dreaded is not that of the 
ritual, but that of the heart,?° which is not so readily 
cleansed as mere bodily defilement. The sense of 
Jesus’ words here clearly does not involve any con- 
flict with a particular ceremonial law, and certainly 
the saying cannot be intended to do away with 
ritual distinctions, for such prevailed in the apos- 
tolic church,”! bat the Master’s meaning is positive 
and affirmative. The moral life has its springs 
within, hence pure character is found where no 
inner source of spoiling exists. In modern terms, 
morality is based upon motives, the good will, 
personality itself; the Oriental teacher describes it 
intelligibly to his hearers by speaking of the heart 
in contrast to ‘‘outward”’ influences. 

The third place to be considered is Mark 8. 15, 


18 Mark 7. 5-23. 9717. 

20“*The heart,” in Oriental phrase, means the essential inner 
person, the chief interests of a man, his “‘self,’’ rather than the 
physical organ. See 1 Sam. 16. 7; Prov. 4. 23. 

21 See Acts 15. 20. 


24 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


17b-21. After the feeding of the four thousand 
Jesus goes across the Sea of Galilee and the evangel- 
ist notes that the disciples had forgotten to take 
provisions with them. Thus when their Teacher 
begins to urge them to beware of the “leaven of the 
Pharisees and the leaven of Herod,’ they construe 
his words literally as a rebuke for their forgetfulness. 
Thereupon Jesus rebukes them indeed for their 
lack of insight, but does not offer them, as he had 
twice before, an explanation of his meaning.“*> They 
are left to find out for themselves, if they can, from 
Jesus’ reference to the two miracles of feeding the 
multitude, what the Master means by those cutting 
words, ‘‘Do you not yet understand?’™ The evangel- 
ist leads us to understand that Jesus’ reference 
to the “leaven’” means something essentially real 
and evil. The use of “‘leaven” in the New Testa- 
ment, in fact, is almost altogether sinister, as witness 
parallels to Mark 8. 15, namely, Matt. 16. 6, 11; 
Luke 12. 1, and 1 Cor. 5. 7f.; Gal. 5. 9. 

Most noteworthy is the fact that here for the 
fourth time” Jesus openly blames the disciples for 
their dullness. The evangelist utilizes the last 
unanswered question: ‘Do you not yet understand?” 
to leave with the reader the impression that the 
satisfaction of physical needs may so obsess a man 
as to obscure his moral vision. As far as the Gospels 
enlighten us, Jesus never put stress upon provision 
for bodily comfort or sustenance. But perhaps on 
many occasions the unenlightened disciple mind 


mS. 1S, *3 See 4. 11-25 and 7. 18-23. 3 BSED 

wi. $3, 40; 7. 18 are the previous instances. Note also the im- 
‘plication of lack of understanding in 8. 4, compare 6. 37b, and 
recall the express statement of the evangelist, 6. 51f. 


25 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


thought one thing while Jesus meant something 
that had to do with higher planes of life. 

‘The fourth significant instance of disciple instruc- 
tion is found in Mark 8. 33, especially the words: 
“And he rebuked Peter, with the words: 
Get behind me, Satan, for you are not thinking . 
about the things of God but about the affairs of 


men.”’ 


In connection with Jesus’ rebuke of Peter, there 
are three highly significant statements made by 


Jesus to his disciples. 


in parallel columns. 


Mark 8. 30 


And he began to 
teach them that the 
Son of man must suf- 
fer many things, and 
must be rejected by 
the elders and by the 
chief priests and the 
scribes, and be killed, 
and after three days 
must rise again. 


9. 3! 

For he was teach- 
ing his disciples, and 
kept saying to them, 
The Son of man is 
delivered up into the 
hands of men, and 
they shall kill him; 
and although killed, 
after three days he 
shall rise again. 


These can best be set forth 


10. 33-34 
Lo, we are going up 
to Jertisalem; and the 
Son of man shall be 
delivered to the chief 
priests and the 
scribes; and they shall 
condemn him to 
death, and shall hand 
him over to the Gen- 
tiles, and they shall 
mock him, and spit 
upon him, and scourge 
him, and kill him; and 
after three days he 

shall rise again. 


The first column introduces this note into the 


second Gospel. At this point in the story, at 
Cesarea Philippi, just before the last journey to 
Jerusalem, Jesus undertook to show his disciples 
what kind of a Messiah he really was. 

The second column contains the evangelist’s 
explanation of Jesus’ haste in passing through 
Galilee without the knowledge of the people,”® and 


76.9, 30. 
26 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


is followed by the statement that the disciples did 
not understand Jesus’ words and feared to ask 
again, probably dreading the rebuke the question 
would call forth. 

The third column is in close connection with a 
statement” that the Twelve were greatly perplexed 
at the unusual bearing of their Master. 

The teaching of these portions of Mark should 
be approached from the point of view of the writer. 
His generation understood the magnificent self- 
sacrifice of Jesus and its moral lesson. Even in 
Nero’s day there were Christian martyrs who 
thoroughly experienced for themselves a devotion 
to truth unshaken by the presence of death. What- 
ever the historical event had proved, however, in 
the sixties, as to the Messiahship of Jesus, our 
evangelist teaches that the contemporaries of Jesus 
learned the real lesson of his life only after his 
death. Mark teaches others, in the words of Jesus, 
that the Master was offering in his life and death 
an exposition of his own teaching as to personal 
service and loyalty to principle. “If anyone will 
be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.” 
“‘Whoever would become great among you shall be 
your servant, . . . for even the Son of man did 
not come to be served but to serve, and to give his 
life a ransom for many.” 

The fifth instance of confidential address to the 
Twelve is offered in Mark 9. 29. Although brief, 
it is of considerable ethical significance, implying 
some progress, if slow, on the part of the disciples 
in the use of remedial methods. As a part of their 
commission” the Twelve had been given “authority 
710. 32. 8 Mark 6. 7. 


27 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


over unclean spirits.” Their appeal to Jesus in 

the case of a lad who was dumb implies that in 

other cases they had successfully used this “‘author- 
ity.” “Why could not we cast it out?” they asked,” 
with the emphasis upon ‘‘we.”’ Jesus responded, 

“This sort cannot come out in any way except in 

prayer.” 

If, as appears quite certain, the men of Jesus’ 
time thought often in terms of magic and often 
saw works of magic performed, it may be that the 
disciples had mistaken the giving of the “‘authority 
over unclean spirits” for the vital personal relation 
which all the evangelists emphasize as a sine qua non 
of efficient discipleship. The answer of Jesus is to 
be understood as encouragement rather than rebuke. 
As a true Teacher he patiently pointed out to these 
first disciples the lessons which, in the evangelist’s 
day, had become standard Christian teaching. 

ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 

t. Make a list of the names of the Twelve, as found in 
the first three Gospels. Note differences in order 
and in names. 

2. Read Mark 6. 7-13 and note whether Mark indicates 
any limits for the mission of the Twelve. Com- 
pare Matt. 10 and comment upon any new ma- 
terial found there or elsewhere in the first Gospel. 

3. Paraphrase Mark 4. 10-25. 

4. What is the Old Testament source for the teaching 
as to ‘‘defilement” to which the Pharisees refer in 
Mark 7. 5? 

5. What traces of popular superstition can be found in 
such places as Mark 5. 28; 7. 35; Luke 13. 16; Matt. 
12. 43-45? Consult Deissmann: Light from the 
Ancient East, pp. 302ff. | 

#9 5 286. 

28 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


6. Point out upon the map relative locations of Cesarea 
Philippi, Sea of Galilee, Jerusalem. 


TEACHING OF JESUS IN MARK ADDRESSED TO 
THE TweELtve (Concluded) 


The sixth instance of address to the Twelve in- 
volves a lengthy portion of the ninth chapter. 
Verses 9.33b, 35b, 37 form Mark’s version of one 
of the most important of Jesus’ deliverances. Its 
ethical content does not demand ingenious apparatus 
for its formulation. These words set forth the 
demand of Jesus that his true followers show con- 
sideration for the rights and for the means of self- 
realization of others rather than seek their own 
advantage or press their own rights. 

The misapprehension of the disciples as to the 
nature of the Kingdom of God, whose near approach 
Jesus and they themselves had heralded,*® led them 
to suppose that there would be desirable places for 
them within that new order. But of the Twelve, 
who should precede? This occasioned an actual 
dispute among them. After the favorite Markan 
method, Jesus begins the lesson with a question: 
‘““What were you talking about as you came along?” 

To this the disciples made no answer, whereupon 
Jesus reveals his knowledge of their selfish ques- 
tionings and announces the principle which should 
have governed their thought about the Kingdom: 

“No man can push his way to prominence 
in the Kingdom of God; but, rather, if he desire 
prominence, let him show proficiency in serving, 
even if he appear to be last of all.’ 


30 See 9g. 1, “Some . . . shall not die till they see the Kingdom of 
God come in power.” 31 Mark g. 35b. 


29 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


This lesson of altruism and unselfishness was 
picturesquely enforced when Jesus reached for a 
near-by child and stood him before the Twelve as 
he told them that any service to the very least and 
most dependent was service rendered to their Master 
and to Him who sent Jesus into the world. Thus, 
not only their Teacher, who was now so well known 
to them, but God himself was included in the world 
of persons to whom service was due.™ 

The introduction of 9.39-50 in such immediate 
connection with the preceding words of Jesus,** indi- 
cates the evangelist’s view that from verse 33 to 
verse 50 the discourse is unitary." 

The pericope® falls naturally into three portions: 
First, 9.38-42. John’s report that the disciples 

had forbidden an unknown miracle-worker to use 

the name of Jesus elicits the statement that the 
use of Jesus’ name commended the man, ‘“‘for,” 
said Jesus, ‘‘he who does not oppose me is for me.” 

No act of service, “in the name of Christ,” can 

bein vain. But the opposite of reward will accrue 


% This service does not appear to be worship in the conventional 
sense, but personal service, often vicarious. That a reciprocal rela- 
tion exists between the Father and the disciple is a teaching which 
Mark and the other evangelists make plain. Mark 11. 25; Matt. 
25. 31ff. See also under Mark I1. 22-25, p. 74. 

% 9, 33b, 35b, 37. ; 

“4 A glance at the parallel arrangement of the Gospels in any 
“harmony” reveals that Matthew and Luke dispose portions of 
this long Markan passage otherwise. No modern student can know 
in what order or in what context these words originally stood. 
But the task of the student is first of all, without question as to the 
original order or context, to approach the words as they stand. 
For here they represent either the understanding of the writer as 
to the original form and setting or they reflect his purpose with 
regard to the reader. Each evangelist clearly felt free to use dis- 
course or narrative material in any order or context that best fitted 
his aim. 

9. 38-50. 


30 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


to anyone who puts obstacles in the way of any 

disciples, who, like children, are learning to walk, 

but easily fall. 

Second, 9. 43-49. This suggests some causes for 
stumbling.*® These may be found close at hand. 
Better remove any such cause than actually make 
a misstep. ‘The test will surely come. So sacri- 
fice even a bodily member rather than sacrifice 
life. 

Third, 9.50. Personal character, after all, is the 
prize. As only salt with its own salty character 
is of worth, so only a person with his own personal 
values unmixed with base things is worthy. The 
verse is a clear statement, in its context, of the 
supreme good that fesides in well developed 
character. 

Between these three divisions of 9.38-50 there 
appear to be certain connectives. The phrase 
“cause one of these little ones to stumble” (42) 
suggests the ‘‘cause thee to stumble’ (43). Again, 
the “salted with fire” (49) suggests the salt logion 
(50). Some divide between verses 48 and 49, 
thus placing the entire statement about salting with 
fire and having salt within oneself in one para- 
graph. But the “for? which introduces verse 49 
makes it preferable to bind that verse closely with 
43-48. Verse 5ob stands alone, and in this form it 
is found in the writing of no other evangelist.*” 

The entire pericope, 9.39—50, has a real connection 
with the incident of the child, 9.35-37, as shown 
in the expression (42) “‘one of these little ones that 


36 The Greek word translated in some versions “offend” means 
“‘stumble.’’ 
37 See Mark g. 50a and Luke 14. 34. 


x 


/ 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


believe on me,”’ for in each case Jesus has in mind 
the attitude of men toward all who are in need of 
sympathy and help, and who may easily be imper- 
iled in their progress. 

What, then, is the teaching of the entire section, 
9.39-50? Most interpreters admit that the meaning | 
by no means lies plainly upon the surface, particu- 
larly in the latter part, containing enigmatical 
reference to salt and fire. 

One must proceed as though only the Gospel of 
Mark were at hand in the interpretation of this 
particular portion of his writing. One must also 
keep in mind the preceding incident, 9. 33-37, for 
Jesus is represented as addressing these very dis- 
ciples, one of whom admitted that he interfered with 
a man who was invoking Jesus’ name, as he sup- 
posed, in an unwarranted way. Jesus, it will be 
recalled, defended the unknown man. 

Further, it should be kept in mind that in the 
view of Mark, the Twelve were none too keen of 
insight. ‘Thus it is not prima facie probable that 
the evangelist would represent to his original readers 
that Jesus spoke to these disciples in riddles, or in 
farfetched and intricate figures. Mark under- 
stands® that Jesus imparted the “secret”? of the 
Kingdom, as plainly as he could, to the Twelve. 

Again, the context shows® that the disciples 
needed instruction to correct their selfish ambition 
for place, and in 9.38ff. the evangelist shows further 
that the group was inclined selfishly to prevent 
others even from doing good in the name of their 
Master, for, said John, “‘he followed not us.”’ This 


® 4.11, 399. 35. 
32 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


display of narrowness of spirit led Jesus to return 
to the thought of service. The unknown man was 
a servant of the good, and the disciple who hin- 
dered him was much like one who puts obstacles 
in the way of any believer. This is a serious offense.” 
The figure of sacrifice, whether of hand or foot or 
eye, or of any part or function that would, if retained, 
lead to the commission of any offense, is used by 
Mark as an exhortation to the Twelve to seek the 
highest moral values and the best ethical attitude 
at any expense, even the loss of something that is 
in itself good. 

That Jesus considered that it would be literally 
necessary for any follower to amputate a member 
of his body in order acceptably to serve God is 
scarcely credible. As far as is known, none of them 
did resort to such measures.*! 

The Oriental teacher, Jesus, is being sketched 
here for a circle of Roman readers, primarily, and 
these readers had enough imagination to understand 
Jesus’ figures better than many a modern commen- 
tator. 

Thus the reader of to-day, putting himself into 
the place of an original reader of the Gospel, need 
not follow too literally the quotation” from Isa. 
66. 24, but may accept it as Oriental imagery which 
a Palestinian teacher would naturally use. When 
Mark chose to place in this connection, then, the 
saying, “for everyone shall be salted with fire,” 
the thought that he intended to convey to the 

a6, (42. 

41 The history of attempts on the part of later Christians to muti- 


late themselves sufficiently refutes a literal acceptance of these 
‘words of Jesus. 
42 


9. 48. 
33 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


reader was that, as the Levitical ritual required that 
all sacrifices be salted,** and as the covenant rela- 
tions between the Israelites and God were termed a 
“covenant of salt.’“* so in the new moral and social 
order the term “‘salt’’ stood for an essential element 


in the moral-spiritual life. ‘“‘Have salt in your- 


selves!’ as an exhortation, means, in this context, 


“Have the Kingdom-nature, which is the Father- 
nature, within you!’ Peaceable relations between 
men who have “‘salt within themselves” are normal 
relations for the Kingdom.*” 

The expression, ‘‘for everyone shall be salted with 
fire’? constitutes a difficulty in interpreting this 
address of Jesus, but it offers less difficulty if con- 
strued, as noted above, directly with the thought of 
verse 48. It partakes of the highly figurative 
nature of verse 48 and must apply to every person 
who “enters into the Kingdom of God’ that is, 
into the “life”? spoken of in verses 43, 45. As an 
expression coined either by Jesus or by the evangel- 
ist, it expresses the thought that the hour of testing 
must come, that dicipleship is not a matter of form, 
and that the experience of him who qualifies would 
be well described as being made fit through sacri- 
ficial fire. 

The seventh portion of the second Gospel in which 
are encountered instructive words of Jesus spoken 
to the disciples is 10.23b—-25, 27bc, 29-31. These 
words constitute the succeeding context to the 
narrative of the Rich Young Ruler, as he is often 

Leva s hte 4 Num. 18. 19. 

“The student is referred to the Sermon on the Mount and to 
ee 18 for the clearest expression in the gospel literature of this 
* Mark 9. 47. 


34 


a 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


termed. Mark does not tell us that he was young, 
but that he had observed the law from youth up. 
It is not said in any Gospel that he was a ruler, 
although he was a well-instructed man and evidently 
averaged well in his practice of the excellent moral 
instruction he had received. The man was indeed 
rich, a characteristic essential for the sequel, al- 
though the reader is not informed as to the nature 
of his wealth. 

His inquiry was, ‘‘How can I inherit eternal life?”*’ 
Jesus began with the law, which assuredly the man 
would know. When the inquiry went beyond the 
contemporary synagogue teaching, Jesus made a 
very concrete and specific proposal, “Supply your 
essential deficiency; go sell whatever you have and 
give to the poor, and you will have treasure in 
heaven; also come and follow me.’’% 

The refusal of the rich man to accept this proposal 
had a sobering and disappointing effect upon the 
Teacher. With pathos he turned to his disciples 
and lamented: ‘‘With what difficulty shall they 
that have riches enter into the Kingdom of God!’ 

Thus far, it appears, the disciples shared the 
emotion of Jesus, although they indicated some lack 
of understanding of the whole incident. Jesus 
repeated and further illustrated his comment: 

“Children, how difficult it is to enter into the 
Kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to 
pass through a needle’s eye than for a rich man 
to enter into the Kingdom of God.’ 

The use of the vocative, ‘‘Children,” betrays the 
Teacher’s solicitude for those before him. 


# 10,.17b. # 10, 25. 49 10, 24b, 25. 


35 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING Pea GOSPELS 


After the exchange of expressions of astonishment 
at this saying, Peter® calls attention to the renun- 
ciation practiced by the Twelve, in that they left 
all to follow Jesus. With the rich man’s question*! 
in mind, Jesus declared that such renunciation 
brings its rewards, both present and future. Per- 
secutions are promised along with whatever material 
advantage may accrue, ‘‘and in the coming age 
eternal life.’”? The following sentence, which forms 
the conclusion of this address of Jesus, is cryptic 
enough: “‘Many first shall be last, and many last 
shall be first.’”? 

Interpreting this statement in its present position, 
without reference to other uses made of it, the 
relative attitudes of the rich man who has just 
departed after his refusal to accept Jesus’ proposal 
and of the disciples, who had given up all to follow 
Jesus, are contrasted. ‘The contemporary order of 
things and that new order taught by Jesus under 
the name of “the Kingdom of God” are also in 
contrast. The rich occupy first places in this order, 
but their very riches tend to prevent them from being 
first in that order where personal values, character, 
“treasures in heaven” are the things that qualify 
one for chief place. These words constitute a very 
solemn closing of an important message to the 
disciples. Well may they have profited by its 
confidential and warning tone. 

No one can justly find in this pericope any con- 
demnation of wealth as such. The influence of the 


6° 10. 28. $1 10, 17b. 52 10. 29-31. . 

53 Weizsacker: Text-bibel, translates very accurately the thought, 
“Vielmal, aber, werden die ersten die letzten sein und die letzten 
die ersten” (Mark Io, 31). 


30 


ACCORDING TO MAREK 


possession of wealth upon personality is empha- 
sized. As far as moral achievement is concerned, 
Jesus says, as Mark puts it, that the possession of 
wealth constitutes a real peril. A rich man may 
too readily accept the primacy given him by his 
contemporaries, not perceiving its superficial char- 
acter. On the other hand, mere renunciation in 
itself may bring no moral advantage. But renun- 
ciation for the sake of some high end, such as service 
of one’s fellow men, is actually enriching, bringing 
wealth in terms of character. 

The eighth portion to be examined is the evangel- 
ist’s report of an intimate conversation between 
Jesus and his disciples, James and John, the two 
sons of Zebedee, whom Jesus had early called to 
follow him.* The reference is Mark 10. 36, 38, 
39b-40, 42-45. James and John preferred an 
ambitious request” concerning places of influence 
for themselves in the “glory” of Jesus, doubtless 
influenced by a wrong conception of the Kingdom 
of God which Jesus had said was soon to come. 
The human nature in the whole proceeding is well 
portrayed, and its exposition lies on the surface. 

The ten who were not taken into the counsel of 
James and John became angry with the two, thereby 
improving the situation in no way. It was a real 
emergency in the training of the Twelve, and Mark 
uses the opportunity of setting forth Jesus’ teaching 
as to the high value of service to one another in the 
Kingdom. The teaching is not new but it is set 
forth in new terms. 

First, Jesus called the two ambitious disciples to 


& Mark 1. 1of. & 10. 47. edt hee 
37 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


him, and afterward the ten. Each group had its 
own lesson. Jesus showed the two their appro- 
priate privileges as his disciples to drink the cup 
and to be baptized with the baptism that was his. 
This the two voluntarily accepted, whereupon 
Jesus called the ten, and patiently reiterated the | 
lesson of 9.35 in the words: 

“You know that those who seem to rule the 
Gentiles bear themselves as their lords, and 
their great ones use their authority oppress- 
ively over them. Not thus is it among you; 
but whoever wills to become great among you 
shall be your servant, and whoever wills to 
become chief among you shall be slave of all; 
for even the Son of man did not come to be 
served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom 
for many.” 10. 42b-45."! 

The ninth instance of address to the Twelve 
appears in 12. 43-44, following the story of the widow 
who bestowed her gift of two mites in the Temple 
treasury. Jesus’ words of commendation were 
scarcely heard by the poor widow, but Mark has 
incorporated them in his account of Jesus’ words as 
follows: 

“Truly I tell you that this poor widow put in 
more than all those who are putting money 
into the treasure chest; for all put in from 
their abundance, but from her lack, this woman 
put in all that she had, all her support.’’*® 

Here the poor, not the rich, has the center of the 
stage. The rich man of 10.21 was required to give 


57 Deissmann’s note on the Greek word ‘lutron,’ ransom, in Light 
from the Anctent East, pp. 331-2, should be consulted. 
58 12. 43b-44. 
38 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


much, this widow gave pitifully little, but she went 
down to her house justified rather than the rich 
man, who, no doubt, really desired eternal life. Mark 
lays great stress upon the lesson of sacrifice, as this 
short address bears witness. In his own person 
Jesus taught that “to serve and to give his life a 
redemption price for many” (as it may properly be 
phrased), is both highest duty and greatest good. 

The tenth and last passage containing words of 
Jesus of ethical import addressed to the disciples 
is found in Mark 14. 6-9.°° The pericope contains 
brief but striking statements, the text of the dis- 
course being furnished by a woman who lavished 
expensive perfume upon Jesus himself. Whether 
impressed by the words, ‘‘Give to the poor and thou 
shalt have treasure in heaven,’ by some other 
words which required of the disciple unselfish devo- 
tion, or even by words so recently spoken, “The 
Son of man did not come to be served,” ‘“‘some’’ who 
stood by sought to restrain the woman from her 
deed. Mark does not say that these were dis- 
ciples, but the inference from later narratives is that 
Jesus’ words here were addressed to the Twelve.” 
Judas was present, according to Mark 14. 10, and 
the ‘‘some”’ are doubtless of the disciple group. 

Jesus here for the first time accepts an act of 
service for himself. Three times, at least, he 
taught his disciples that he was on his way to suf- 
fering and death, as he took his way toward Jerusa- 
lem. Now he is in Jerusalem (or in Bethany, on 

59 13. 5b—37 consists of an eschatological discourse, the longest on 
Jesus’ lips in this Gospel. It is addressed to four disciples, but 
because of its peculiar nature, the chapter will be discussed under 


. another rubric. See page 61ff. 
60 50. 2Ib. $1 0. 4§. 6 Matt. 26. 8; John 12. 4. 


39 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the Mount of Olives) and his fate appears imminent. 
But his followers seem to think rather of a trium- 
phal march to a new economic or political order® 
than of death for their leader. One woman seems 
to have taken him literally. Lest she be unable to 
perform the last tender rites for the beloved dead 
when his fate should overtake him, she bestows her 
rich gift of love even while he is at supper. Jesus 
indicates his appreciation of this attitude in the 
words, ‘‘She did what she could; she anticipated 
the anointing of my body for burial.”™ 

It is not to be assumed that this woman of literal 
faith perceived coming events in detail. Her be- 
lief in his own words® prompted the timely service. 
The celebration of her deed in coming generations® 
would not be for the cost of the perfume, over which 
“some” grieved, but for the sympathetic response 
of her soul to the self-sacrifice of her Master. The 
material values shrink in Jesus’ thought before 
those eternal values of a developing personality. 

The foregoing ten selections from Jesus’ addresses 
to his immediate disciples contain the important 
private ethical teaching of the Master as Mark 
presents it. Other passages might have been ad- 
duced, as the instructions” to the disciples as they 
went on their mission; the remark,® evidently 
addressed to the Twelve, ‘‘O faithless generation!”’; 
an explanation in private of Jesus’ view of remarriage 
after divorce, and the prophecy of Peter’s denial,” 
which is not so much teaching but serves chiefly in 
imparting dramatic force to the narrative.” 


an 34010) .27° us 7-10. 14. 8. 6 For example, 8. 30f.; 9. 3ibe; 10. 33- 

14. 6. 8-11. ® 9. 19. 69 10. IIb, 12. ° 14. 30f. 

71 Mark HM what no other Gospel writer did in noting (14. 68c) 
the first cock-crow just before the second denial of Peter. 


40 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


The words of Jesus spoken in the garden direct 
the disciples as to their personal bearing in the 
approaching crisis, but furnish no element of specific 
ethical instruction, except by implication. With the 
anointing of Jesus’ body in anticipation of his 
burial and the Master’s comment upon the act, 
Mark ceases to introduce examples of formal in- 
struction to the Twelve. 

At this point a summary of the ethical teaching 
of the Twelve by Jesus as the Second Evangelist 
presents it, finds appropriate place. 

The phrase “Kingdom of God’ appears fre- 
quently upon Jesus’ lips. In contemporary thought 
the term ‘Reign of God” doubtless best expressed 
the original Aramaic phrase. Jesus nowhere de- 
fines his understanding of the term, but the ambitious 
request of the two disciples’ and Jesus’ answer 
leave no doubt that something other than a merely 
political or economic order was in his mind. The 
announcements of his passion prepare the reader 
for the sequel, which makes it impossible for Jesus 
to rule in person over the new order. Conventional 
standards of preeminence within the Kingdom are 
apparently reversed.” 

Wealth, like other impersonal values, may prove 
a hindrance to one who desires to be under the 
Reign of God. But this hindrance is found in the 
use of the material thing and in the interest or affec- 
tion lavished upon it. Personal values, on the other 
hand, reckoned in terms of service and character, rank 
high among those who find place in the new order. 

Jesus’ teaching in these respects evidently de- 
- parted from the contemporary synagogue instruction, 
7? 10. 35ff. 78.9. 35b. | 

4I 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


for the disciples were slow in apprehending their 
Master’s meaning. Even in the exercise of efficient 
prayer these men were unskillful,” although they must 
have prayed after the Jewish manner all their lives. 

Altruism and unselfishness stand out as chief 
elements in character that is approved for entrance 
into the Kingdom. This chief note in the private 
instruction of Jesus was reinforced by the example 
of the Teacher himself. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 


1. Upon examination of the context, show whether Mark 
understands that 4. 21-34 represents private or 
public instruction. If addressed to the Twelve, 
what elements could be added to the foregoing 
summary? 

2. What evidence is to be found in the teaching con- 
sidered above that Jesus had little or no interest in 
human life as it is actually lived? What evidence 
is found to the contrary? 

3. Is there any good reason for supposing that the poor 
were more responsive to Jesus’ teaching than were 
the rich? Can you offer any evidence that the 

_ situation is now changed in this respect? 

4. Find the essential features in the Pharisees’ teaching 
as to the Kingdom of God in Jesus’ time. 

5. Paraphrase the story of the woman who anointed 
Jesus’ head with perfume. Bring out the ethical 
features of the narrative clearly. 

6. Present your own understanding of “the greatest 
good”’ or summum bonum, in Jesus’ ethical teaching 
according to Mark, thus far. 


PoPpuULAR ADDRESSES AND PARABLES 
Mark makes it clear that Jesus taught in public 
™ 9. 29. 
42 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


and that his favorite method was the use of simile 
or parable, many of which were employed but few 
of which the evangelist records. The parable of 
12. 1-11.is addressed to the religious leaders, accord- 
ing to the demand of the context, although the 
people may have overheard it. 

Mark does not consistently maintain that Jesus 
spoke only in parables to the people,” for while 218 
Greek words suffice for his report of the parables 
in Mark 4. 3-9, 26-32, there are 311 Greek words 
used to report words that Jesus addresses to the 
“multitudes,” as Mark picturesquely puts it, in 
E-153 3.33735; 6-4; 8.34b-9. 1; 12.35b-37a, and 
12. 38-40; to which may be added words addressed 
to a foreign woman, namely, 7. 27, 29. 

The study of this popular teaching throws further 
light upon the concept of the Kingdom of God. 
It cannot be presumed, however, that this teaching 
was as clearly apprehended by Jesus’ hearers as by 
the readers of the second Gospel. The following 
paragraphs present the gist of this popular teaching 
in Mark. 

Mark 1. raf.: 

“After the arrest of John, Jesus came into 
Galilee proclaiming the good news of God in 
the words: The time is fulfilled and the Reign 
of God draws nigh: Repent and believe in the 
good news.” 

In this public proclamation, Jesus assumes an 
expectation of the coming of a new era. The time 
of acceptation is ripe, the new era is at hand. Nat- 
urally, the hearers want to know how to enjoy the 





™ 4. 34. 
43 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


fre. 


privileges of the new order. Two conditions, 
pentance” and “faith,” are to be met.” 

The saying has more ethical meaning than theo- 
logical. It is addressed to men not versed in the 
lore of the scribes but, rather, too well versed in the 
oppressive conditions of the life they live. Both 
conditions, repentance and faith, have to do with 
conduct, but conduct, in Jesus’ thought, is not 
merely mechanical behavior. Conduct, with the 
Teacher, is behavior produced by the life itself, by 
underlying nature and motive. Thus. repentance 
involves a change of attitude, a renewed thought 
about God and men; while faith, holding here much 
of its Old Testament sense, means a practical de- 
pendence upon and cooperation in the new order 
as an acknowledgment of the presence of God in 
the world of human persons. 

Mark 3. 33-35 constitutes words addressed to 
the public in the form of an excursus or interjection. 
Jesus was teaching a large crowd that sat about 
him” when word was brought that his mother and 
his brothers were outside, asking for him: 

‘‘And in answer to them he said, Who is my 
mother and my brothers? and after surveying 
those seated about him in a circle, he said: 
Behold my mother and my brothers; whoso- 
ever does the will of God, the same is my 
brother and sister and mother.” 

It cannot be an accident that Mark introduced 
these words thus early in his narrative, for they 
explain that the relation of the disciple to the Master 


7° A. B. Bruce: The Kingdom of God, pp. 94-108, argues cogently 
that faith is in reality the sole basis of entrance to the Kingdom. 
BRED 


44 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


accounts for the successful ‘‘repentance” and “be- 
lief’? which admit to the Kingdom. The relation- 
ships indicated in the terms ‘‘mother,’ ‘“‘sister,”’ 
“brother,” are such as involve likeness of nature.” 
“Mark considered the saying so significant that he 
omitted all other discourse of Jesus on that occasion 
and preserved only this ejaculation. 

Mark 6. 4 contains an impulsive retort of Jesus, 
perhaps in itself a proverbial expression. The 
scene is the synagogue at Nazareth and Jesus is 
addressing his fellow townsmen. They do not 
accept him as a teacher, whereupon he exclaims: 
‘“‘A prophet is not unappreciated except in his home- 
land and among his relatives and in his city.” 

Mark had already shown” that Jesus’ family 
tried to restrain him from teaching, and in this 
place it appears that no “faith’’ or practical depend- 
ence upon him as a teacher existed in his home- 
land, not enough even to enable him to work cures, 
except upon the very few.*° 

The evangelist indicates that the element of faith 
in Jesus conditioned the success of his program, as 
surely as faith was a condition of entrance into the 
Kingdom of God which Jesus taught was imminent. 

Mark 7. 27, 29 presents two interesting state- 
ments of Jesus made to a woman not an Israelite. 
She begged healing for her daughter: 

“First let the children be satisfied,” said 
Jesus; “‘it is not seemly to take the bread of the 
children and throw it to the curs.” The 
woman responded with the words: ‘‘Yes, Mas- 


% This saying is very important, as will be seen in its further 
exposition on page 7r1f. 
9 3. 21. ae 6.5. 


45 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


ter, even the curs under the table are accus- 
tomed to eat of the children’s crumbs.”’ 

The significance attached to these words by the 
evangelist is seen in the further reply of Jesus: 
‘“Because of this answer depart, the demon has gone 
out of your daughter.” 

If faith is evidenced by activity, coupled with 
strategy and wit, this woman had qualified as a 
recipient of God’s good gifts. Jesus found her 
spirit a congenial one, unlike those of his native 
city. Mark admits that a person not an Israelite 
received good at Jesus’ hands. The admission 
goes further, however. It teaches that others than 
Israelites, in the thought of Jesus, may obtain good 
things through faith in him and in God, as well as 
can the descendants of Abraham. In this incident 
the evangelist has taught the fundamental truth 
of that universalism which, in the view of the first 
evangelist, Jesus himself did not teach.*! 

Mark 8. 34b-g. 1 constitutes the longest address 
to the people to be found in the second Gospel, only 
the parable of the Soils and the two parables of the 
Inevitable Fruitage and of the Mustard Seed in 
chapter 4 approaching this passage in length.” 

Jesus called the crowd to him, with his disciples, 
-and thus addressed them all: 


81 ““Universalism’’ is here used to mean the world-wide, interna- 
tional application of Jesus’ teaching, as, for example, Paul prac- 
ticed it. Compare Matt. 15. 21-28. The First evangelist does 
not admit that Jesus went into a house in heathen territory (com- 
pare Mark 7. 24), nor even that Jesus went into that land (see 
Matt. 15.22), but toits borders. See Matt. ro. 5f.; 15. 24 for nation- 
alistic sentiment. 


* There are one hundred and twenty-two Greek words in 8. 34b- 
g. I; one hundred and thirteen in Mark 4. 26-32, and one hundred 
and five in 4. 3-9. 


46 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


“Tf any one decides to come after me, (that is, 
be my disciple), let him deny himself and let 
him take up his cross and follow me. For 
whosoever sets his mind upon his own life shall 
lose it, but whosoever shall lose his life for the 
sake of the glad tidings, (that is, the proclama- 
tion concerning the Reign of God), shall save it. 
For what profits it a man to gain the whole 
world and to lose his life? for what should a man 
give as a ransom for his life? For whosoever 
is ashamed of me and of my words in this im- 
moral and sinful generation, of him also shall 
the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come 
in the glory of his Father, with the holy angels.” 
And he said to them, “Verily I tell you that 
there are certain of those who stand here who 
shall not taste of death until they see the Reign 
of God having come in power.” 

The last part of this address possesses elements 
which relate it to chapter 13. For the present, 
attention will not be fixed upon this part of the 
evangelist’s message. The first part of the peri- 
cope, however, distinctly contributes to the ethical 
program of Jesus in this Gospel. 

Some men have probably offered themselves as 
disciples of Jesus, attracted by his announcement 
that the Reign of God is at hand. The time is late 
in Jesus’ ministry. A major turning-point in his 
career has just been reached. If the Master takes 
his mission seriously, so must the disciple. To 
follow Jesus is to do the will of God, as Jesus does. 
To be his disciple is to enter upon the supreme 
moral adventure of life. But moral enterprises 
have great risks. Did not the prophets lay down 


47 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


their lives for their convictions? Truly, asserts 
Jesus, a man who decides to follow him must be 
ready to lose his life, for, strangely yet truly enough, 
if one decides to save one’s life at all hazards, then 
one will achieve less in the moral realm. The 
attention will be fixed upon conservation of phy- 
sical existence. Then how can due attention be 
placed upon character development, upon spiritual 
achievement? Like the Master, the follower must 
make the physical life subordinate to the supreme 
demand of truth, of loyalty, of the life of the soul 
itself. 

The address of Jesus here is in the nature of a 
challenge. But it is based upon such considerations 
as were familiar to all who heard. In no place 
has any evangelist made a sharper contrast be- 
tween material values and personal worth. 

Mark 12. 35b-37a. These verses present a Mes- 
sianic riddle, ostensibly BO TESECE to the people, 
but not answered by anyone: 

‘“‘How say the scribes that Christ is the son 
of David? David himself said, in the Holy 
Spirit, The Lord said to my lord, Sit on my 
right hand until I put thine enemies under thy 
feet. David himself calls him lord, whence 
then is he his son?” 

The remark of the evangelist immediately fol- 
lowing this unanswered question of Jesus, that the 
people heard with enjoyment, indicates to the 
reader that the scribes, who were no popular favor- 

S/This may be a part of the address to the scribe of 12. 28, for 
the phrase ‘‘and the great crowd was hearing him gladly” (12. 37b), 
could belong to the following paragraph. But the question (35b), 


‘‘How say the scribes . . . ?”’ implies that Jesus was addressing 
the laity and having a little fun in exposing their dilemma. 


48 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


ites, were victims of the wit of their Teacher. 
It is, of course, known to Bible students of to-day 
that David did not write the one hundred and tenth 
psalm, from which the quotation is made. To 
Jesus’ contemporaries, however, this was not known, 
and the argument must be accepted upon that 
basis. In any event, the dilemma is in the specu- 
lative and not in the practical realm, thus con- 
tributes little if anything to an investigation into 
the moral precepts of Jesus. 

Mark 12. 38-40 almost immediately follows the 
Messianic riddle, and, indeed, may, in the thought 
of the writer, be a continuation of the discourse in 
the Temple. The words were uttered “in the 
course of his teaching,’ larger portions of which 
are preserved by the other synoptic writers. These 
words of Mark contain very serious charges against 
the scribes: 

“Beware of the scribes, who desire to walk 
about in long robes and seek greetings in the 
market places and chief seats in the synagogues, 
and high places at feasts, who devour the houses 
of widows and who for appearance’s sake say long 
prayers. These shall receive greater judgment.” 

Mark’s original readers were probably members of 
the church in the city of Rome. Mark, however, had 
earlier lived in Jerusalem, and his own mother may 
have known instances of such immorality on the 
part of the scribes. But in Rome, also, there is 
every reason to suppose, there existed such instances 
of hypocrisy as here set forth. Such men, wherever 
found, represent a moral antinomy. Matthew, who 
wrote for Palestinian readers, expanded this address 
in the temple into a most cutting denunciation of the 


49 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


religious leaders.** But Mark does not appear to in- 


clude all the scribes in his denunciation, for within 
a few verses,® he has Jesus tell a scribe that he is 
“not far from the Reign of God.” 

No one may plead position or influence as an . 
excuse for moral turpitude or for immoral deeds, 
declares the Master. Jesus saw that the existing 
religious institutions were losing caste - morally, 
while emphasizing formal religious observances. 
The emphasis upon moral uprightness, correspond- 
ence of inner motive and outer act, comes well at 
the close of Mark’s record of Jesus’ popular teaching. 

In the foregoing exposition of popular address 
the few parables addressed to the people have been 
omitted. At this point some consideration must 
be given them. 

Of the three parables in chapter four, the second 
and third are introduced by the formulas, ‘Thus 
is the Kingdom of God’*® and “How shall we liken 
the Kingdom of God, or in what simile shall we set 
it forth?’’*®” With the first parable no such formula 
is used. The explanation of this parable of the 
different soils*® was given in the presence of the 
Twelve, but the parable itself was spoken before a 
great crowd on the shore of the Sea of Galilee.®® 
As the discussion above” has shown, this is not so 
much a kingdom-parable as it is a graphic portrayal 
of the different degrees of success with which the 
Twelve will meet in their mission. But so funda- 


8 Matt. 23. Consult Burton and Goodspeed, A Harmony of the 
ea ep Gospels. | 
26. 


wit © 4. 30. 
es Note the title of this parable in Burton and Goodspeed: A 
Sh of the Synoptic Gospels. 
dt 90 See pages 22-23. 


SO 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


mental is the truth involved, so true to human 
nature, that all who are interested in social better- 
ment and moral uplift find conditions analogous to 
these types of soil. Some hearers do not retain 
the message at all, some are superficial and enthu- 
siastic but without endurance, some accept the 
truth but give it no open space to grow into their 
mental habit, when other interests obliterate it. 
But some hear, appropriate, and cultivate. Life 
is the fruitage. 

Two parables that shed light upon the idea of 
the Reign of God are found in Mark 4. 26-29, 30- 
32. The first may be called “A Parable of Inevi- 
table Fruitage,’”’ the second, usually called the 
parable of the Mustard Seed, may better be entitled 
‘“‘A Parable of Small Beginnings,” “A Parable of 
Encouragement.” 

The parable of Inevitable Fruitage is found only 
in this Gospel. It reads: 

“Thus is the Reign of God, as if a man should 
cast the seed upon the earth, and should sleep 
and arise, night and day, and the seed should 
sprout and grow to its height, how, he himself 
knows not. The earth brings forth of itself, 
first a green shoot, then an ear, then full grain 
in the ear. And when it yields a harvest, im- 
mediately he sends forth the sickle and the 
harvest becomes a fact.” 

The teaching of the parable is that fruitage is 
inevitable, granted proper conditions. Not the 
seed itself, but the life within the seed is empha- 
sized. The earth brings forth “of itself’? because 
of the inherent life in good seed. So the Kingdom 
has life in itself, which will inevitably bring its 


51 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


appropriate product. Stages in its growth must 
be noted, patience may be needed, but confidence 
in the outcome is the disciple’s right. 

As with all parables, every term in the simile may 
not be equally stressed. Here the sickle, for example, 
constitutes a part of the setting, not a prominent 
feature. A proper ending of an agricultural story 
includes the gathering of the grain. But in this 
parable the sickle cannot be invested with the 
significance that it has in another type of writing.” 
Verse 28 contains the gist of the parable and offers 
the point of emphasis: ‘‘The earth brings forth of 
itself, first a green shoot, then an ear, then full 
grain in the ear.’ 

The verses immediately following the Parable of 
Inevitable Fruitage constitute a simile designed to 
show how the Kingdom of God may become exceed- 
ingly great, even with small beginnings. The 
Parable of Small Beginnings” reads thus: 


‘“‘How shall we liken the Kingdom of God, or 
in what simile shall we set it forth? As a 
mustard seed, which is smaller than all the 
seeds sown upon the earth, and when it is sown 
it grows up and becomes greater than all the 
herbs, and puts forth great branches, so that 
under its shadow the birds of the heavens can 
Nest,’ 

The disciples and others who heard these words 
were dwelling in the days of small things. The 
teaching is universally sound, however, that a pro- 
gram of truth will attract to itself more and more 
adherents. The worthy elements of life may at a 


*% For example, Revelation 14. 14f., 17ff. 2 4. 30-32. 
52 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


given period seem pitifully small, but in the per- 
spective of the ages the larger growth of the almost 
invisible germ must appear. 

Some sense of fulfillment, even in his day, must 
have come to the evangelist. For, in his day, Paul 
had carried the new movement and its ethical 
program into the heart of the Roman Empire, 
even to the capital city. And in this very imperial 
city, Mark, looking back over the forty years, more 
or less, since the parables were uttered, must have 
been guided in his choice of these from so many™ 
because the full grain was appearing to him to be 
forming in the ear, and the mustard plant was 
already spreading its branches”. 

The section on “‘Popular Address and Parables” 
of Jesus may be summarized thus: 

Jesus spoke publicly of the Reign of God as immi- 
nent. The invitation to enjoy its privileges con- 
tained announcement of two conditions which must 
be fulfilled; first, the appropriate attitude must be 
attained (repentance); second, practical alliance 
with and dependence upon the movement as a pro- 
gram of individual and social betterment must 
follow (faith). Both conditions involve ethical 
values. | 

The new order was not to arrive suddenly, nor 
would it be fully developed at first. Like a seed, 
with life in it, it would reach maturity through nor- 

% Mark 4. 2, 10b, 33.° 

% The assumption is made that these three parables of Mark 4 
were spoken before a larger number of people than the Twelve. 
With the Parable of the Soils this is clear. With the other two the 
case stands thus: Mark assures us (4. 33f.) that parables were 
spoken in public even if explained in private. The words (4. 21, 24) 


“the said to them” most likely means the disciples. But (4. 26, 30) 
“And he said’”’ seems to begin a different address, probably public. 


53 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


mal stages, but its fruitage would come with full 
growth. Small beginnings could not discourage 
one who had faith in the vitality of the new order. 

An ethical relation is established between the 
man who ‘“‘does the will of God’ and Jesus, who . 
proclaims the coming Reign of God. The terms of 
family relation appropriately describe this brother- 
hood. 

Membership in the community thus bound to- 
gether by ethical attitude and relation is to be 
undertaken seriously. Loyalty to the new moral 
program may demand sacrifice of life itself. 

Contemporary teachers of religion (scribes) may 
not be taken as standards of conduct, for often 
their religion is unethical. Among those engaged 
in the program of the Reign of God, the inner life 
and motive must be the effective spring of all action. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What particulars, if any, does this chapter add to 
Mark’s exposition of the Reign of God? 

2. In your own words, explain the ethical content of 
“repentance” and ‘‘faith.”’ 

3. Collect evidence from this Gospel to show that Jesus’ 
own family had little sympathy with his mission. 

4. In what way does the narrative of the Greek woman 
of Mark 7. 26ff. illustrate the saying: ‘Seek and 
you shall find?” Where is this saying found? 

5. Paraphrase Mark 8. 34-37. 

6. Make a list of English words, new to you, found in 
the first four chapters of the textbook. Give their 
proper pronunciation and explain their meaning. 

7. What was the origin and history of the scribes of 
Jesus’ time? 

8. By what means do various authorities designate the 


54 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


_ parables of Mark 4? Criticize these titles, select- 
ing those most descriptive. 


Worps ADDRESSED TO CONTEMPORARY RELI- 
GIoUS LEADERS AND TEACHERS 


In thirteen places” within the second Gospel 
Jesus addresses some of the religious leaders and 
teachers directly, in a majority of the instances 
challenging them upon something that they had 
said, or upon los evident attitude. In three 
additional instances” the rulers i in question probably 
overheard the words of Jesus.” 

These addresses, involving 923 Greek words, are 
selected by Mark to exhibit the Master’s appraisal 
of such moral leadership as Judaism enjoyed. 

The distribution of these words throughout the 
Gospel is of interest. Six instances are found in 
chapters 2 and 3; seven are in chapters 11 and 12. 
The three remaining instances of direct or over- 
heard address are found in chapters 7, 8, and 10, one 
in each chapter. Thus, at the beginning and at 
the end of the ministry of Jesus the Second Evangel- 
ist places the greatest conflict of Jesus with con- 
temporary teachers and men of influence in his 
ancestral religion. 

The questions involved are either ethico-religious 
or strictly ethical in character. Of the first type, the 
question as to the authority of Jesus to forgive 
sin,** to drive out the traders from the Temple,’ 


% 2, 8b-11; 2. 17bc; 2. 19-22; 2. 25b-28; 3. 4; 3. 23-29; 7. 6-13; 
10.53, a Ti; 201), 330% 82. 1-110. 126, 150, 165170} 12. 24-27 > 12, 
29731; 
% 8. ob: 4 Co HD LY 35b-372. 
vid Por example, R 1. 18, ‘‘chief priests and scribes heard.” 
% 2. 10. ett 53. 


55 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


or the demand for a sign from heaven to confirm 
his claim to divine authority,’ the Messiah question 
raised by Jesus himself and not answered,’ and 
again, early in his ministry’ the cryptic words 
about a new ethico-religious order, and the right 
use of the Temple-area,’ together with a specula- 
tive question about the rights of several husbands 
to one wife at the resurrection, constitute the sub- 
stance. 

Of the strictly ethical questions raised or an- 
swered by the Teacher, there are the following: 
Jesus asserted his authority in the moral field by 
pointing out to those who criticized him for con- 
sorting with social outcasts that these are in reality 
the needy. As such they have a prior. claim upon 
one who can aid them.‘ Jesus charges that the 
established leaders have proved, on the whole, dis- 
loyal to their trust!” and that many religious teachers 
of the day are superficial, even hypocritical. He 
plainly answers a practical inquiry as to what con- 
stitutes the most important moral precept. The 
answer is in terms of the Torah! and plainly tells 
his questioner, when he shows some clear under- 
standing of this precept, that he is “‘not far from the 
Kingdom of God.’ 

Early in his Gospel Mark put Jesuson record!” 
as to the practical impossibility of divided alle- 
giance. ‘If a house be divided against itself, that 
house cannot stand.”"° This practical observation 
is in the spirit of the Shema which the scribe recited’ 


100 8. 12b. 101 12, 37b—38a. 

103 2, 19-22. 18.1. 17d. 1042. 17b. 

105 12. I-11. 1066 7. 6-13. 107 12, 29-31. 108 12. 34b. 
389.3.\24. 110 3. 25. M1 12. 2off. 


56 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


and is again expressed in the answer of Jesus to a 
captious political question, ‘“‘Cesar’s things render 
to Cesar and God’s things to God.’’!” 

Two other ethical problems raised in Jesus’ dis- 
course with the contemporary teachers concerned 
the observance of the Sabbath and the legality of 
divorce. 

Jesus indicated’ that the Sabbath as an insti- 
tution should not lord it over human beings. Men 
should use the institution in the spirit of a helpful 
agency. Jesus argued that in time of need David, 
the great king, ate the sacred bread from before the 
altar. David’s need surpassed the right even of a 
religious custom. Thus, Jesus ruled, any deed that 
was for the good of men might be performed on the 
Sabbath, custom to the contrary notwithstanding."* 
In the saying, “‘The Son of man is lord even of the 
Sabbath” he subordinated the letter of the law or 
any outgrown or unyielding institution to the 
demand for conservation of human values. 

The divorce question must find place for fuller 
discussion in a later chapter, for the problem at- 
tracted the attention of each of the synoptic writers, 
and the tradition as to what Jesus really said re- 
veals specific differences in Matthew, Mark and 
Luke. In the second Gospel," in answer to an 
inquiry made probably by Pharisees,’!® Jesus crit- 
icized the Deuteronomic warrant for divorce,!!’ 
asserting that marriage is essentially indissoluble. 
With his disciples privately'!® the Teacher discourses 


113.72, 17. 113 2, 25b-28; 3. 4. 114 2. 4-6, 115 10, 3, 5-09. 
' 16 The words “Pharisees, coming to him,” are not certainly 
original. 
117 Deut. 24. 1-3. 498 40. If: 


57 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


further upon the implications of his public state- 
ment, especially with respect to remarriage after 
divorce. 

The antipathy which Jesus revealed toward the 
teaching and the character of some of his contem- 
poraries suggests the inquiry whether this attitude 
extended to the religion or moral teaching con- 
tained in their Scriptures. A brief investigation 
into the use of Old Testament quotations by the 
Second Evangelist will offer an answer. 

Without reference to the 107 Greek words from 
the Old Testament used in the narrative by Mark 
or placed by him on the lips of others, there are 
379 words on Jesus’ lips which, according to the 
editors of the Westcott and Hort Greek Testa- 
ment, are words from the Jewish Scriptures. Analy- 
sis of these words shows that 126 words, in ten quota- 
tions, are from the Torah; 196 words, in twenty-seven 
quotations, are from the prophets; while fifty-seven 
words are taken from the Psalms. 

Practically all the quotations from the Torah are 
made with approval. The exceptions are Deut. 24. 
rt, quoted in Mark 10.4, and the law of the Levi- 
rate marriage, which Jesus comments upon, giv- 
ing tacit approval to the law itself, but disapproving 
the Sadducees’ use of it. The quotation, it should 
be noted, is not included among the words counted 
above as those of Jesus. Some of the quotations 
are not important, being rather formal likenesses, 
but the majority are easily identified as words 
taken intentionally from the Scriptures. 

The preponderance of quotations from the proph- 
ets, Isaiah being the favorite, with nine quotations; 
Daniel, with six; Ezekiel, with three; Zechariah, 


58 


“ACCORDING TO MARK 


with three; Malachi and Joel, two each; Micah and 
Jeremiah, one each, is noticeable. As far as the 
great preachers of righteousness of the past are 
concerned, Jesus has no criticism. The divorce 
law may have served in its time, but had become 
antiquated. But in their great declarations as to 
the duty and good of men the law and the prophets 
were authoritative. 

In matters of ritual, it seems probable that Jesus 
was precise, if the detail involved did not collide 
with human need or with any personal prerogative. 
The leper’? Jesus told to go and show himself to 
the priest, for Lev. 14. 2ff. required the priest to 
act as health officer for the community in such 
cases. Yet, when a hard-and-fast Sabbath rule, 
drawn up by the predecessors of the contemporary 
teachers, would deny to a needy man a deed of 
mercy,’? or to hungry men available food, Jesus 
set forth his protest that ‘“‘the Sabbath was made 
for man.’?! In such manner the great Teacher 
sets personal values higher than venerable institu- 
tions and even traditional codes. 

Jesus is clear that the prophets had deep and 
accurate insight into moral problems and a high 
appraisal of personal values. When Jesus cleanses 
the Temple he appeals to the words of Isa. 56. 7, 
‘““My house shall be called a house of prayer for all 
peoples.”” And even before the time of that Temple 
of which the prophet of Isa. 56.7 spoke, Jeremiah 
had said that the Temple had become a ‘“‘den of 
robbers.’ 

That the prophets placed obedience before sac- 


197, 44. 120 For example, 2. 25-28; 3. 3b-5. 12. 27. 
ler 7, 11: 


59 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


rifice, and a right life before formal offerings to God, 
Jesus acknowledged in his words of appreciation 
of that scribe’? who quoted the essence of Mic. 6. 
6-8. That scribe was not far from the Kingdom 
which Jesus was announcing as imminent. 

In summarizing this study of Jesus’ words to con- 
temporary religious leaders and teachers, and his 
attitude toward the moral instruction which their 
Scriptures and institutions represented, it must be 
admitted that the Master did not turn abruptly 
away from the current ethics. There was much 
that was sound and permanent in the teachings of 
those who had gone before him. This worthy 
heritage he sought to bring out in its full value. 
He put emphasis where it seemed to him appropriate, 
he placed old statements in new perspective, but 
at the same time he stigmatized as false prophets 
all who deliberately obscured ancient truth. The 
casuistry of the day'* he scored in the very words 
of the prophet’” who rebuked his contemporaries 
for drawing near to God with their lips and actually 
(in their hearts) remaining far from him. 

That all human values were not clearly compre- 
hended in the law was evident to Jesus. When 
the rich man declared that he had kept all the 
commandments in the Decalog’® there was “one 
thing” still lacking. He must find a vital and sym- 
pathetic fellowship with men who were hungry for 
more than food and poor in other than money. Be- 
tween these men and him the barrier was wealth. 
Yet even the Old Testament prophets understood 
some of these higher ethical values, as when Isaiah 

123 Mark 12. 32. 14 Mark 7. 8ff. 1% Tsa. 29. 13. 

126 Mark Io. 18f. 

60 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


protested that formal observances could not make 
religion pleasing to God.” And Hosea complained 
that the people of God were destroyed for lack of 
the right knowledge of God,’* while Micah clearly 
expounded the higher values in life, compared with 
which rivers of oil and thousands of rams were as 
nothing.’ 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 


1. Who were the contemporary religious leaders? Give 
a short account of the Pharisees. 

2. Why should religious leaders at Jerusalem go to hear 
a Galilean layman? 

3. Find and report upon the Jewish rules for Sabbath 
observance in Jesus’ time. 

4. What justification is there for the name “‘the ethical 
prophets,” applied to Amos, Hosea, Micah, Isaiah? 

5. Can you point out any tradition or institution, espe- 
cially in the religion of to-day, which could to advan- 
tage be restated or reformed, as Jesus restated the 
marriage law or the nature of the Sabbath? 

6. To what extent does Mark thus far lead the reader 
to believe that he considers Jesus a member of the 
Jewish church, seeking to reform it from within? 
What evidence is there to the contrary? 

7. As a result of your study thus far, are you inclined 
to consider the Kingdom of God as something to be 
realized in the future, or as an ethical program in 
which Jesus expected his disciples to engage at — 
once? Give reasons for your answer. 


THE APOCALYPSE IN MARK 13 


With the study of this section, an adequate 
survey of the various addresses, lengthy and brief, 
of the Master will be completed. It will remain, 


127 Isa. 1. 10ff. 128 Hos. 4. 6. 129 Mic. 6. 6-8. 
61 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


then, to summarize the ethical teaching of Mark 
under the topics, first: The Kingdom of God in 
Mark, and the Messiah-Teacher who proclaimed 
its imminence; second, the Ethical Relation be- 
tween men, Jesus, and the Father, taught by Mark 
as his chief contribution to the Ethics of Jesus. 

The discussion, in fact, could proceed without 
any reference to the thirteenth chapter, or, more 
particularly, 13. 5b-37, which forms the ‘“‘apoca- 
lypse’ of the Gospel. Its omission, however, 
might raise questions in the student’s mind, since 
the passage in question forms the longest single 
discourse of Jesus within the second Gospel. 

Mark 13. 1-2 forms a very natural approach to 
the longer address. A disciple remarks upon the 
massive and beautiful stones of the Temple and the 
Master returns answer that the building is destined 
to be destroyed. This conversation is resumed, 
13. 3-5a, when Jesus, with Peter, James, John, and 
Andrew, is somewhere on the Mount of Olives, east 
of the Temple and the city, looking over toward the 
wonderful building. Recalling Jesus’ remark, the 
disciples ask him when the destruction of the Tem- 
ple will happen, and what signs will portend the 
event. Thereupon Jesus delivers an uninterrupted 
portrayal of dire happenings, warning his disciples 
against deceivers who shall come in his name, 
finally giving an indefinite answer to their question, 
“When?” but urging to extreme watchfulness. 

The discourse properly divides into the following 
parts: 5-13, warnings for the disciples; 14-23, por- 
tents of the coming events and other warnings 
against false Christs; 24-27, the advent of the Son 
of man, coming in clouds. Verses 28-37 form an 

62 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


epilog, corresponding to the introduction, or prolog, 
I-4. 3 

Verses 30-32 are somewhat in the tone of 9. 1 
and in reality give the answer to the disciples’ 
question of verse 4. The writer of the Gospel must 
have understood (a) that Jesus assured his hearers 
that at least some of those who heard him speak 
would live to see the spectacular coming of the Son 
of man on the clouds,’*? and (6) that even Jesus was 
not able to certify precisely, the time when this 
event was to take place. 

The historical fact is that the event did not take 
place when the evangelist, if not Jesus, supposed 
it would. Later writings of the New Testament 
cease to emphasize the spectacular arrival of the 
Son of man upon the clouds and place stress upon 
the spiritual union of Jesus with those who follow 
him in the Reign of God. 

The destruction of the Temple did occur in 70 
A. D., and the words in 13. 2b may be taken as 
descriptive of this calamity. The tone of 13. 2, 
“Are you looking upon these great. buildings? ‘There 
shall not be left here a stone upon a stone, which 
shall not certainly be cast down,” is that of a teacher 
who is trying to turn the attention of his hearers 
to more permanent things. By the time of the 
composition of this Gospel, the church at large, 
well represented by the church in Rome, for which 
Mark was writing, recognized that the Temple was 
not the center of Christianity. But the case was 
otherwise with the men, all of the Jewish church, 
who stood that day with Jesus on the Mount ofOlives. 

In the times of Jesus! and of Mark, interest in 


180 Compare 14. 62. 
63 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


that type of literature represented by Daniel in the 
Jewish Scriptures, and termed by later generations 
“apocalyptic literature,” was very high. It has 
been satisfactorily established that apocalypticism 
flourished best in communities where oppressive 
conditions prevailed. 

It is easily possible that Jesus felt the influence 
of this type of thought and its literary expression 
in his time, and the evangelist leaves the reader 
with a clear impression that in his last address to 
his intimate friends, he discussed these two events, 
then future to them, the destruction of the Temple 
and his own return in the clouds.!*! 

The element of moral instruction in the chapter 
is not very large. Positively expressed, the ethical 
matter is: 

Consider more permanent things than build- 
ings, which can be utterly destroyed.” For 
men will try to lead you astray in my name, 
after I am gone,’ and you will be subjected 
to inquisition, when the danger of personal 
default will be a real peril.!%* For it is only he 
who endures to the end who shall find the chief 
values in life. Be watchful, against dangers 
within and without,’ and learn to estimate 
the real values. 

431 Tt is not in place to enter upon a critical discussion of this 
chapter, with its parallels. The student will have become familiar 
with the various theories concerning it in the study of the Gospels 
from the point of view of New Testament Introduction. The 
works of Doctor Charles deal most skillfully with the apocalyptic 
literature, and the discussions of the term, ‘‘Son of man,” are 
legion. This chapter is written in view of the assumption, made 
at the beginning, that each Gospel represents a unitary work, upon 
which at least the last editor has put his stamp of approval. The 


particular task here is to analyze the ethics of each Gospel. 
iga)2, (0 gar 5-218. 134 13, Q—-13. 1% 13, 23,°33-37. 


64 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. In what particulars, if any, does chapter 13 modify 
the conception of the Reign of God as found else- 
where in the Gospel? 

2. In what part of the Book of Enoch is found a passage 
which reminds one of 13. 26 in Mark? 

3. Verify the statement that the name ‘‘Son of man”’ is 
Jesus’ own self-designation, with reference to the 
Gospels only. 

4. To what extent does Christianity nowadays take 
interest in apocalyptic writings? 

5. Find instances of apocalyptic writing in the New 
Testament, outside the Gospels and the Revela- 
tion of John. 

6. Prepare a brief historical sketch of the destruction of 
Jerusalem by Titus in 70 A. D. 

7. In how many places are the names, ‘‘Peter,”’ ““James,”’ 
and “John” found together? In how many places 
is the name “‘Andrew”’ added, as in 13. 3? 

8. Assuming that the book of Daniel was written about 
164 B.C., what events in the history of the Jews 
would probably be reflected in that apocalypse? 


THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN THE SECOND GOSPEL 
AND THE MESSIAH-TEACHER AS ITS SPONSOR 


The term, “Kingdom of God,” or more clearly 
expressed, ‘“‘the Reign of God,” was not an invention 
of any Gospel writer, nor, indeed, of Jesus himself, 
however much the evangelists may have modified 
the content of the phrase. Of the canonical writings, 
the book of Daniel had the largest influence upon 
Jewish thinking concerning the coming of a new 
rule of God that should overcome all kingdoms of 
the earth. The Pharisaic writings that followed 


148 Daniel 2. I-45. 


65 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Daniel, however, were doubtless responsible for a 
very materialistic expectation concerning the coming 
Kingdom of God. All pious Israelites, like Joseph 
of Arimathea, were “looking for the Reign of 
God,’’!*” and Jesus used words that led his contem- 
poraries to expect that such a “‘Reign’”’ would come 
in power.’® The Teacher also used words to indi- 
cate that in a real sense the Reign of God was near 
to his hearers.’*? See particularly Driver: Daniel, 
in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, 
pp. lxxxv-xc. Men of Jesus’ time could “receive — 
the Kingdom,’”!° or, yielding to some hindrance, 
such as riches’! or other besetment, might be 
shut out of the Kingdom. 

The disparity between a kingdom that is near 
and the coming of a Kingdom in power is perhaps 
explained in the figure of development, which 
Jesus introduced into some parables of Mark. 
Either the development of a grain of wheat grad- 
ually into a stalk and ear full of grain,!** or of a small 
seed into a great plant,’ points to stages in develop- 
ment. The Reign of God might indeed prevail in 
some degree, and men might be invited to come 
under God’s sway in a community of persons seeking 
to do God’s will, and yet the coming of that Reign 
to a place of dominance over other reigns might 
well be something to expect. 

Still another aspect of the Kingdom of God, 


137 Mark 15. 43. 

89. 1, “see the Kingdom of God come with power”; <- Lap as: 
“that day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of God.” 

1397. 15, ‘‘the Kingdom of God is at hand”; 12. 34, “not far from 
the Kingdom. i) 

140 10, 15. 141 10, 23-25. 189.47. 134. 28. 

144. 31f. 

66 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


however, is seen in the teaching’ that men were 
incapable of knowing all at once the “‘mysteries’’ 
of the new order. Mark shows very clearly that 
this was the case with the Twelve. But to those 
who make the Kingdom their chief object of de- 
votion it is given to know the mysteries, and at 
length these “chosen”? become so proficient and 
experienced that they can teach others. 

A unique passage in gospel literature is found in 
Mark 11. ro: “Blessed be the coming kingdom of © 
our Father David!” The words are part of the 
ecstatic exclamation of the ‘“‘many’’*® who took 
part in the triumphal entrance of Jesus into Jeru- 
salem. This spontaneous celebration was clearly 
a Messianic outburst on the part of disciples who 
had come to believe that Jesus really proclaimed 
the imminence of the Kingdom, yet who misunder- 
stood its nature. It would be entirely in harmony 
with the views of this evangelist, who sets so clearly 
before his readers the failure of the Twelve to under- 
stand Jesus, to set down also this very Jewish 
exclamation of these disciples (and probably others) 
as they enthusiastically sang the Hosanna and part 
of Psalm 118 as Jesus entered Jerusalem.’ The 
expression is not to be understood as in any way 
expressing Jesus’ view of the Reign of God.. 

While the above references to the Kingdom con- 
stitute all that are found in Mark directly mentioning 
the new order, it will be shown below that Jesus 
continues to teach about the Reign of God even 
when the term is not used. In fact, it is probable 


uk eee MG x4. 8! HAG 3 
47 The other evangelists omit this sentence acclaiming the com- 
ing kingdom of David. 


67 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


that the most important contribution of the second 
Gospel to the understanding of the Reign of God 
is this evangelist’s exposition of the ethical relations 
that exist between men who constitute the Kingdom 
and between men and God. 

The mention above of the enthusiastic acclama- 
tion of the “many” who sang “Hosanna” when — 
Jesus entered Jerusalem, and their very Jewish 
description of the Kingdom as that of ‘‘our father 
David,’ reminds the reader that at that very 
moment Jesus was advancing to an unparalleled 
discipline of suffering and to death. 

These pages have already emphasized the failure 
of Jesus’ contemporaries to understand him, a fact 
so apparent to Mark that here in his Gospel he has 
quite fully expounded the Christian view of the 
Messiah as his own generation and church had 
come to understand him. He was the Messiah- 
Teacher, who served, suffered and died, a con- 
sistent witness to the spirit of that community 
whose Herald he was and whose Ruler was the 
Father. 

Jesus, to the Second Evangelist, was a man of 
tremendous social sympathy, who never refused 
helpful service to any who needed. From the 
beginning of his ministry to the end Mark indi- 
cates a path for Jesus which was strewn with human 
wreckage, much of which was salvaged. From 
being social liabilities, men become social assets; 
from being dependents upon the community, now 
restored in limb and faculties, men become workers. 
The list of healings in the Gospel is impressive. 
An insane man in the synagogue at Capernaum,’® 

18 7, 23ff. | 


68 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


Simon’s wife’s mother,'** a crowd of persons, ill and 
demented,’ a leper,!*! a palsied man,” a man with 
a withered hand,'* the Gerasene demoniac,’™* Jai- 
rus’ daughter and the woman with a hemorrhage,’*° 
the daughter of the Greek woman,’ the deaf man 
who could not speak plainly, privately healed,’’ 
the blind man of Bethsaida,!® the demented child 
whom the disciples could not heal,!°? Bartimeus at 
Jericho’s gate,’ together with instances of numbers 
together,’® are catalogued by Mark to show to what 
an extent Jesus practiced this social ministry. This 
openness to the appeal for help was not inconsistent 
with his admonition to service. 

To the Twelve the Teacher declared that it was 
his own lot to suffer and die,!® and his words seem 
to the modern reader entirely unambiguous. And 
in the time of the evangelist this personal feature 
of the Master’s ethical program was recognized as 
an appropriate element in the program of the King- 
dom. 

Jesus’ interest in and compassion for people was 
spontaneous.’ He offered his example as worthy 
of the disciples’ emulation, and, true to his convic- 
tion that personal service to men is the best way 
to bring about a brotherhood among men and to 
establish a close ethical relation between man and 
man, and between men and the Father, he went to 
his death, saying: ““The Son of mancame .. . to 
serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.” | 


“97, 30f. 150 7, 32-34, bly, 4off, 


182 2. 3ff. 153 3. 1ff. 14 5. off. 166 5, 22-43. 
166 7, 25ff. 187 7, 32ff. We 8. 2211. 1599. 14ff. 
160 10. 46ff. 8! 3, 39; 3. 10; 6. 5, 55. 


' 1028. 31; 9. Of., 31; 10. 33; 14. 8, 18-21, 27, 41. 
163 6, 34; 8. 2; 10. 21; 14. 38. 


69 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


The Messiah of Mark is a teacher of men, a servant 
of all, the Servant of God. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What passages in Isaiah are called ‘‘the servant pas- 
sages’? 

2. What traits of the “servant of Jehovah” has Mark 
appropriated for use in his delineation of Jesus? 
Are these in the nature of direct quotation or other- 

, wise? 

3. Why is the term ‘‘Kingdom”’ less appropriate to-day 
than it was in the first century as a designation of 
the movement inaugurated by Jesus? What term 
could be used to-day? 

4. What ‘‘Pharisaic writings’ contained references to the 
Kingdom of God? 

5. What religions in the Roman Empire of the first cen- 
tury taught in so-called ‘‘mysteries’’? 

6. After a study of the four narratives of the triumphal 
entrance of Jesus into Jerusalem, what conclusion 
do you reach as to the personnel of the “many”’ 
who sang “‘Hosanna’”’? How widely known did this 
event become immediately? What was Jesus’ atti- 
tude toward the proceedings? 7 

7. What elements of organization, if any, are ascribed by 
Mark to the Kingdom. of God? 


ETHICAL VALUES WITHIN THE NEW 
BROTHERHOOD 


From the foregoing exposition of the Reign of God 
the person and conduct of Jesus are seen to be illus- 
trative of his conception of the new order, according 
to the second Gospel. In this section, devoted to 
a final summary of the ethical teaching of Mark’s 
Gospel, the relations between all persons concerned 
in the Reign of God are to be traced. 


7° 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


In his presentation of the important teaching 
which has been analyzed Mark had before him some 
cardinal principle of the moral life to which other 
subjects, namely, the Messiahship of Jesus, the 
identity of the Son of man and his future coming 
on the clouds of heaven, the public ministry of 
Jesus, the mission of the Twelve, and even the 
Passion story, were all subordinated. This principle 
was something that concerned men’s daily inter- 
course in all social and business relations and human 
life in all its phases, including the fellowship of men 
with the Father of all. This was no other than the 
principle of living together, the establishment of 
ethical relations between men. 

The best point of departure for the exposition of 
this principle is doubtless found in that incident 
near the end of Jesus’ life when the disciples dis- 
cussed acrimoniously their individual chances of 
preferment.!** Two of their number tried to obtain 
the coveted preferment by direct appeal. The 
answer of Jesus was that greatness or prominence 
among those who live the life of the Kingdom is not 
an assigned favor.’ No outward mark or office 
makes a man ethically superior. This “greatness,” 
however, can be won. It is an achievement wrought 
by unselfish service of others and is illustrated not 
only in the words of Jesus but in his example, “‘for 
the Son of man came not to be served, but to serve.” 

A second important saying, which is fully as funda- 
mental to. Mark’s exposition of ethical relations 
between men and Jesus and, through him, between 
men and the Father, is 3. 33-35: 


14 O, 34; 10. 35. 1659. 356-37; 10. 42b-45. 
71 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


“He said, Who is my mother and my broth- 
ers? and after surveying those seated about 
him ina circle, he said: Behold my mother and 
my brothers; whosoever does the will of God, 
the same is my brother and sister and mother.”’ 

With these sayings in chapters 3, 9 and 10 in mind, 
as the key to Jesus’ teaching in Mark as to the heart 
of the moral life, further insight into the method of | 
the evangelist will show that the authority of Jesus, 
the joyous fellowship between Master and disciples, 
and the practical ethics of the community which 
they formed, all become of service in exhibiting the 
“mystery of the Kingdom” as the Christians of the 
seventh decade of the first century understood it. 

Back of the call of the first disciples there was an 
evident authority. This was clear even to the many 
who heard the Master publicly,© and it became 
apparent to religious leaders, who explained it in 
their own fashion.’®” Mark thinks of the great 
Teacher as a commanding personality. Even pow- 
ers in the mysterious spirit world recognized his 
authority,! and the cosmic forces obeyed his be- 
hest.'** But as shown by the preponderance of 
private teaching in this Gospel,!”° it was to the dis- 
ciples that this authority appeared most clearly and 
most powerfully.’ 

The fellowship between Jesus and the disciples 
appeared to Mark to be, for the period of their 
instruction, somewhat joyous. The disciples, said 
Jesus, do not fast while he is with them,!” not- 
withstanding much of their time is spent among 


gat Wee Pie Oe a 167 3. 22b. 
168 J, 27b, bagi AC SER ee 169 4. 39-41. 0 Pages 21ff. 
M71 See 8 722° 18-20, 


72 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


the outcast and miserable,!’* the very numerous 
folk whose plight might well excite pity and lead 
to pessimism. But the Teacher does not take a 
somber view of life to the “sinners” and the sick, 
who have need of a cheerful physician. 

This group of men under the tutelage of Jesus 
were brought into contact, not only with the poor, 
the outcast, the sick, but with the mentally deranged, 
thus invading that which seemed to the man of that 
time a supernatural realm, where demons lurked, 
ready to possess the body of an unfortunate,!” 
and where the men so “possessed”? were vividly 
referred to as the spirits themselves.” Here magic 
formulas could bind one’s tongue,!* but the author- 
ity that was in Jesus could unloose the “bond of the 
tongue,” open the blind eyes or make the deaf to 
hear, despite demonic influence. It was in this 
realm that the power of effective prayer on Jesus’ 
part exorcised a demon who resisted the delegated 
authority of the disciples.” 

A note of optimism, although not an empty and 
enthusiastic optimism, and which frequently becomes 
infectious, always dominates the words of the 
Teacher.'” 

To our evangelist, this fellowship, glad, opti- 
mistic, constructive, had as its function the estab- 
lishment of a real devotion to the Master, in a bond 
not only of service but of likeness. Even when 
Peter failed to understand clearly what sort of 
Messiah Jesus was, his avowal of loyalty’? and 
"18-2, 15-17. Mes, 1-4 

Ay tt.: 8. 435. 8 7.) 486. 

17 7. 37; 9. 29; compare 6. 7. 


178 4. 29, “harvest is come,” 5. 36, ‘fear not, only believe.” 
79 74. 29. 


73 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


adventure into personal danger,’®? despite his 


_ denial, revealed his fundamental allegiance to his 
Master in his own person. The literature of the 
apostolic age is unanimous in ascribing to this 
apostle a primacy which was not so much due to 
ecclesiastical appointment as to personal achieve- 
ment. 

The practical ethics of the small community made 
up of Jesus and his disciples (probably many more 
than twelve), finds exposition in a number of places. 
One of the late lessons’®! was one of the most prac- 
tical and fundamental. This was the lesson of 
dependence upon God, the word being “faith.” 
The shriveled fig tree was an object lesson, which 
Mark brings out in the staccato, “‘Have faith in 
God,” when the disciple spoke his wonder. If one 
depend upon the Father, what power is in one’s 
band! This tree is as nothing. When the little 
hand in the tossing boat was terrified’? the Master 
asked, ‘‘Why are you afraid? Have you no faith?” 
This quality in a man was fundamental to entrance 
into the Kingdom. Of course it was ncoeaaiy as 
an element of Kingdom-living. 

The brotherhood involved in the existence of 
ethical relations between members of the community 
was based upon the older moral codes. ‘‘When- 
ever you stand in prayer, forgive, if you have any- 
thing against anyone.’’®? The ancient moral maxim 
of the Shema is a basis for Kingdom life.’ In 
few words, for Jesus’ ethics in all the Gospels seem 
reducible to but few principles, the man of the 


89 14. 47, 54. wade 42 
182 4. 40, 183 YT, 25. 184 Deut. 6. 4f. 
185 Mark 12. 20ff. 


74 


ACCORDING TO MARK 


Kingdom regards his fellowman unselfishly rather 
than with a view to his exploitation. And selfish- 
ness of all forms is alien to the men who live under 
the Reign of God. 


“ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. In what way is the authority of Jesus exhibited in the 
call of his early disciples? References, 1. 17, 20; 
2 TAs Oaigats 

2. Explain in modern terms the remark of the evan- 
gelist that the disciples’ “heart was hardened,”’ 6. 52. 

3. What evidence for or against the thesis that Jesus 
believed in the reality of demons is found in this 
Gospel? 

4. What is probably the modern explanation of the 
phenomena which early Christian writers termed 
demon possession? 

5. What personal ethical values do you find in Mark 8. 
34-36, expressed in terms most familiar to mem- 
bers of the class? 

6. What practical result would follow if an entire com- 
munity, for example, a college community, adopted 
the program which Mark teaches as the program 
of the Kingdom? 


75 


CHAPTER III 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL 
ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


ANALYSIS OF THE DISCOURSE ELEMENT IN 
MATTHEW 


THE Gospel according to Matthew is the ethical 
Gospel par excellence. ‘The work is written from the 
standpoint of the conservative side of early Chris- 
tianity, emphasizing the fulfillment of the Jewish 
Scriptures in the life and teaching of Jesus. In 
the spirit of many of the Jewish books, this evan- 
gelist often puts into his portrayal of Jesus’ work 
passages that show his reader how sympathetic the 
Master was with the prevailing moral teaching.’ 

Compared with Mark, with its 11,271 words, 
4,006 of which were words of Jesus, the first Gospel 
contains 18,499 words, of which 10,489 are words 
spoken by the Master.”. The narrative material of 
Mark comprises a total of 7,267 words, as compared 
with 7,880 of Matthew. The difference in length 
between Mark and Matthew is thus seen to be 
almost entirely in discourse or teaching material. 
The narrative of Matthew is, according to author- 
ities upon the synoptic Gospels, almost entirely taken 


1 See 5. 17; 8. 4; 9. 13; 12. 7; 15. 7-9; 19. 17-19; and other pas- 
sages. 
3 The count is on the basis of Westcott and Hort’s Greek text. 
76 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


over from Mark by the First Evangelist,® although 
it is to be noted that each evangelist lets his own 
style predominate. 

The structure of the first Gospel, then, presents 
the appearance of a narrative framework within 
which are placed with fine literary skill words and 
discourses which well indicate to the reader the 
interest of the evangelist in ethical teaching. 

Jesus in the first Gospel is the Teacher through- 
out. In training his disciples he expends fine exe- 
gesis upon the Torah, approves all the weightier 
matters of the moral law, quotes the ethical prophets 
with glowing approval, and declares the imminence 
of a moral order which will preserve all the best in 
the old yet which will bring out moral truth in so- 
cial application as never before understood. Here 
Jesus is no heavenly dreamer. His interest is 
decidedly in the life that men are living in this world. 
The Kingdom of God will harmonize to some extent 
with their dreams of a new economic order, for it 
will be bound up with the daily life of men, but, 
contrary to their dreams, its approach will be other 
than militant. 

Matthew has a frequently noted tendency to 
collect teaching material into long discourses. Of 
these, chapters 5, 6, 7 contain the Sermon on the 
Mount (1,937 words), chapter 1o, the address to the 
Twelve (639 words), chapter 18 (613 words, inter- 

* William Sanday, in Oxford Studies in}the Synoptic ehlogeceildy ae 
estimates that of the six hundred and sixty-one verses of Mark, 
“‘all but some fifty verses have been actually incorporated in the 
other two Gospels,’’ and H. B. Swete, in his Commentary on St. 
Mark, p. 1xix, points out that of the one hundred and six sections 
of Mark, but three are wholly absent from Matthew and Luke 


together, and of the remainder ninety-six sections are to be found 
in Matthew. 


77 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


rupted once by a question from Peter), chapter 23 
(638 words), chapter 24 (745 words in uninterrupted 
discourse, plus 17 in verse 2), chapter 25 (751 
words). Thus a total of 5,323 words (Greek) are 
placed by Matthew in six solid blocks of discourse. 

But there are other collections of Jesus’ words 
which, although interrupted more or less by inter- 
jections or questions, form important discourses 
in this Gospel. Chapter 11 (406 words in four 
groups), chapter 12 (602 words in six groups), 
chapter 13 (843 words in eight groups, but slightly 
divided by narrative), chapters 19-20 (687 words 
in seventeen groups, the largest, 308 words, extending 
from 19. 28 to 20. 16), chapter 21 (425 words in-ten 
groups), and chapter 22 (397 words in eight groups). 

Conversational connectives are most numerous in 
chapters 4, 8, 9, 16,17, and 26. The last mentioned 
chapter corresponds to Mark 14, in which, as noted 
above, there is found a large amount of dialog. 

Some of the discourse material is to be found in 
both Mark and Matthew, notably the parable of 
the Soils,* the discussion of the purpose of parables, 
following this parable, together with the explanation 
of the parable privately to the disciples, the parable 
of the Mustard Seed (Small Beginnings), the dis- 
cussion of ceremonial and real uncleanness,°> the 
definition of ‘‘the greatest,’’® and the discussion of 
such social questions as divorce and wealth,’ to- 
gether with a number of smaller and perhaps less 
important passages. 


* Mark 4. 1-9; Matt. 13. I-9. 

5 Mark 7. 1-23; Matt. 15. I-20. 

§ Mark 9. 33-37; Matt. 18. 1-5. 

7 Mark 10. I-12, 17-31; Matt. 19. 1-12, 16-30. 


78 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


In summarizing the distribution of the teaching 
material in the first Gospel. it is noted that the 
writer has a tendency to group the words of Jesus 
into longer discourses, that he uses most of the dis- 
course material as well as the narrative material 
of Mark, but adds considerably to the former. The 
most conspicuous of the ethical discourses are the 
Sermon on the Mount,® the Address to the Twelve, 
as they go out upon their mission,’ Discussions of: 
Institutional and Ceremonial Matters with the 
Religious Leaders,!? The Parables of the Kingdom,” 
Exposition of the Law of Mutual Relationships,” 
Social Principles within the Kingdom,” Parable of 
Gracious Justice, and the Discourses of Passion 
Week.” . 


' ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLAss REPORTS. 


1. Report upon three instances of Jesus’ approval of 
the Jewish moral law. Is his approval unqualified? 

2. How many instances of approving quotation from the 
prophets can you find on Jesus’ lips in this Gospel? 
Give references. 

3. Compare Matthew with Mark in the use of parables. 
4. In what respects, if any, do Jesus’ discourses resem-. 
ble the formal lectures of a teacher of ethics? 

s. What differences, if any, appear between Mark and 
Matthew in the use of questions on Jesus’ lips? 
Does Jesus in both Gospels alike ask questions 
with a view to gaining information? 

6. Find the most descriptive names for the parables 
spoken during Passion Week, according to Matthew. 

7. Point out as many quotations as possible from the 
prophets made by the evangelist. 


8 Chapters 5-6-7. ° Chapter Io. 10 Chapters 12 and 15. 
11 Chapter 13. 12 Chapter 18. _ 8 Chapter 19. 
14 Chapter 20. 18 Chapters 21-25 inclusive, 


79 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


8. What are the regular formulas used by this evan- 
gelist to introduce parables? Point out any par- 
bles not introduced by such a formula. 

g. If you were to select five discourses in this Gospel 
containing its most intensely ethical material, 
which chapters or parts of chapters would you 
name? What titles would best fit these five dis- — 
courses? 

10. Estimate the relative proportion of Old Testament 
words used by Jesus (a) in chapter 13; (b) in 
chapter 19; (c) in chapter 23. 


OUTLINE OF THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT 


The study of Matthean ethics begins properly 
with the largest and most comprehensive discourse 
within the first Gospel, which is quite. universally 
termed the Sermon on the Mount. Considered in 
its form as found in Chapters 5, 6, and 7, this moral 
document constitutes a most engaging survey of 
the chief themes upon which Jesus delivered himself. 
No portion of any Gospel surpasses these three 
chapters in importance for the student of the ethics 
of the Gospels. 

For the purpose of clearness, an outline and 
synopsis of the Sermon on the Mount will be offered 
at this point. 


INTRODUCTION: Matt. 5. 1-16. 


A composite portrait of a potential member 
of that community which is both defined as and 
characterized by the Reign of God. 

The several beatitudes indicate varied aspects 
of character and outward conditions experienced 
by members of the new brotherhood, while the 


80 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


Salt and Light metaphors point out the function 
of those who qualify.’® 


I. The Moral Order as Taught by Jesus, and its Rela- 
tion to the Current Jewish Ethics. 5. 17-48. 


1. The Law survives as an integral part of the 
new order,” such a social order as the most 
optimistic of the prophets had hoped for. 
But in this Reign of God, the “rightness”’ of 
the men who constitute the ethical community 
from now on must be better, finer, more 
exacting than that type of character demanded 
by the teaching of contemporary professional 
teachers in the synagogues. 

2. What, then, is this “‘more exacting’”’ or 
ceeding” right-ness? It is illustrated thus. 

a. Murder, so far from being alone judged 
as an evil deed, is seen to be instigated by 
even hateful thought. Thus, under the 
Reign of God no grudge should be allowed 
to lodge and grow. From small dif- 
ferences come serious consequences.” 

b. Adultery, a product of unsocial and 
impure thinking, leads to social disinte- 
gration, to disruption of the family and 
to the degradation of the individual.” 

(<) Since unsocial passions arise from 
unsocial thinking and evil imagina- 
tion, the reconstruction of the thought- 
life is demanded even if radical meas- 
ures are needed. Only a pure mind 
can guarantee moral conduct.”! 


(S$ ay 


15, 3-16. 5. 17-20. 1% 5. 21-48. 195. 21-26. 
5.2732. at 5, 27-30. 
81 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


C. 


#'5. 31-32. 


(iz) Divorce, as a menace to an eth- 
ically sound monogamy, finds 
its strength in the weakness 
of a superficial morality. In 
the Reign of God, the marriage 
relation in its ideal form is 
guaranteed by pure motives, 
emotions, and thoughts.” 

The taking of oaths, as practised according 
to ancient precepts and contemporary 
teaching, leads to casuistry and actual 
reversal of the avowed purpose of such 
vows. Often moral values are voided 
by the clever use of pious formulas. In 
a strictly ethical regime, personal integrity 
is such that oaths are not needed. “Yea” 
in word is but the expression of a ‘‘Yea’’ 
of the inner life.” 


. Retaliation is currently justified upon 


the basis of certain ancient words. But 
men are by nature so constituted that 
the sway of such a law and practice 
arouses dormant selfishness and revenge- 
ful motives that are not easily satisfied. 
This makes for social disintegration. But 
the Reign of God makes for social inte- 
gration. Thus, instead of the rule of 
eye for eye, life for life, the surpassing 
standard of living demanded within the 
new moral order adopts the constructive 
attitude. This, so far from demanding 
revenge, insists upon no right for its own 
sake, but cooperates in building up ami- 
8 5. 33-37: 
82 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


cable relationships and developing a real 
brotherhood.” 


. In the spirit of the preceding rule, a high 


test of the “surpassing righteousness”’ of 
any member of the ethical brotherhood 
is found in his ability to love the unlovely. 
For this is what the Father does. Men 
thus “‘become sons of. the Father,” as 
they acquire the will to be generous 
toward the unlovely and unkind.” 


II. The Reign of God in its Social Evidences. Matt. 
6. 1-34. 

1. There are ethical values in religious functions, 
beyond their form. These values are re- 
flected in the community life most favorably 
when the religious form is properly evaluated 
by the individual who makes use of it. Illus- 
trations in particular are philanthropy, 
prayer, and fasting.” 


a. 


In philanthropy, ethical values reside 
not so much in the formal performance of 
a duty as in unostentatious and sympa- 
thetic help. Ostentation and publicity 
in themselves reflect self-interest. The 
moral community is enriched by unselfish 
and sympathetic men.” 

Prayer may be but a form, but a “‘son of 
the Father’? knows his own ethical rela- 
tionship and best attains fellowship with 
the Father in private prayer. Only when 
prayer becomes a personal relation does 


. 45. 38~42. 35. 43-48. 266... 1-18. 76. I-4. 


83 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


its ethical force react upon the commu- 
nity."2> Not by mere phrases can one 
enter into fellowship with God,” yet if an 
illustration be asked for, it is found in 
the model prayer.*® 


c. Fasting is not an exercise devised to — 


exhibit one’s virtue or piety to others. 
When effective it is essentially a personal 
affair between the ‘“‘son”’.and the Father.** 


2. Personal values in the moral community take 
precedence over all other alleged worth.” 


G. 


One who depends upon material wealth 
thereby evidences a bent unworthy of 
the Reign of God. ‘For where thy 
treasure is, there thy heart is as well.” 
Personal values are not subject to damage 
by moth or rust, nor can thieves take 
them away. Highest values are apart 
from the material things so often eagerly 
sought.** 

Generosity marks the “son of the Father.” 
The “son” will use wealth, but will not 
abuse it. The difference lies in the end 
toward which it is used. The “‘single 
eye” signifies the opposite of niggard- 
liness and selfishness.** 


c. Loyalty is normal within the truly ethical 


6. 5-15. 
26. 19-34. 


community. It is impossible to divide 
allegiance between competing interests. 
Unity of attitude, entirety of devotion to 
personal interests, and unselfishness in 


“ig Yer A 39 6. 9-15. 316. 16-18. 
36, 19-21. "6, 22-23. 


84 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


the use of all advantage characterize the 
citizen of such a community.” 

d. If (a) one is not to emphasize wealth, if 
(b) one is to be generous with one’s pos- 
sessions, and if (c) one cannot find any 
mean between emphasis upon personal and 
material values, the question arises, “How 
then, shall my needs be met?” The 
personal, solicitous interest of the Father 
in his children furnishes the answer. 
Not one’s needs, but one’s character, 
in fact, the possession of the Father’s 
nature through sonship,*® is to be first 
considered. Supreme trust in the prov- 
ident will of the Father is the rule.*” 


III. The Rule of Reciprocity Within the Ethical Com- 
munity, and Other Practical Tests of its Citizens. 
PE Sat ee 

1. In the Reign of God all tests of character or 
determination of values in the community 
life proceed under certain laws. There is a 
reciprocity that is commendable, for it is con- 
structive. But arbitrary and partial critical 
judgments lead to a reciprocal judgment and 
an attitude which bars progress.** Self-exam- 
ination is more rational than judgment of 
others, and must precede any attempt to eval- 
uate others’ deeds. Yet values must be dis- 
cerned and in the course of life moral judg- 
ments must be made.*® 


356, 24. 5. 43ff. 7 6. 25-34. 37. 1-2. 
' Matt. 7. cee aro 10. 15; 7. 6, 15f. 


85 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


2. Not hasty judgment, but cooperation, char- 
acterizes the worthy man. Reciprocity of the 
constructive sort is practiced in the daily life 
of the Kingdom. The Father furnishes an 
example, for the earnest seeker will find; to 
him that asks, the needed boon will be given,* — 
and such a regime begets in the kingdom- 
minded the supreme type of reciprocity, where- 
by each one vies with every other in measuring 
service to his fellow by his own need and 
desire.*! 

3. Admission to that'ethical community in which 
the sway of God and his right-ness is supreme 
is open to the discerning. But kingdom- 
values will not be obvious to those whose 
interests are selfish. The figure of a narrow 
door illustrates the ease with which self-ab- 
sorption excludes from the better life those 
under a program of self-seeking. The broad 
way is easy to follow.*. 

4. “By their fruits you shall know them,” twice 
stated (7. 16, 20), constitutes a pronouncement 
of the normative power of the inner or real na- 
ture. Here is judgment, to besure. The prophet 
who takes but the form of a prophet, the user 
of phrases which have no content, the tree or 
vine that is unfruitful, illustrate the principle 
that a valid moral life depends upon the 
directive force and informing nature of the 
attitude or motive. Even if men fail to dis- 
cern the false, still the Father, whose nature 
true sons possess, will declare, “I never knew 
WOU | 

40 Matt. 7. 7-11. al >. 12. 427. 13-14. 487 15-23. 
86 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


ConcLusion: Matt. 7. 24-27. 


The foregoing principles are so inextricably 
associated with the life that men live that it may 
be said solemnly of all who take them otherwise 
than seriously and with acceptance, that they are 
like men who deliberately or ignorantly build upon 
an insecure foundation. The tests of life make 
such a man at length ridiculous. But the serious 
and practical hearer and user of these sound 
principles will build his character as a super- 
structure upon an enduring basis. His character 
endures because from within outward, and from 
below upward it is sound. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 

1. After study of the foregoing summary analysis, de- 
vise the best subject to place above the Sermon on 
the Mount. 

2. What verse or verses best express the theme that 
dominates the whole of the Sermon? 

3. How much of the Sermon can be found in Mark? 

4. Since a certain similarity between the narratives of 
Mark and Matthew has been indicated, find the 
place in Mark’s narrative where this Sermon 
could properly be inserted. 

5. How does the Sermon on the Plain in Luke compare 
quantitatively with the Sermon on the Mount? 

6. Discuss the statement that the Sermon is in sub- 
stance “primitive preaching of Christianity.” See 
Burkitt, Gospel History and Its Transmission, p. 39. 

7. Is it probable that 5. 13-16 applies to the apostles 
only? Who were the hearers of the Sermon, 
according to Matthew’s context? 

8. Does the analysis indicate that, in the estimation of 
the evangelist, Jesus broke away, from J udaism, 
or that he built upon Judaism? 


37 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


9. On psychological grounds, how does the Sermon thus 
far appeal to you as an example of instruction 
addressed to unlearned men and women? 

10. To what extent should one distinguish between the 
present literary form of the Sermon on the Mount 
and Jesus’ oral address to the disciples? 


THE SERMON ON THE Mount: CHARACTER 
AND FUNCTION OF THOSE WHO QUALIFY 
FOR THE NEW ORDER 


The interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount 
properly starts out from its setting—geographical, 
historical, and literary. Involved are also economic 
conditions of its time, religious practice and hopes. 
The Sermon itself is in literary form which it took 
more than a generation after the words which it re- 
ports. were spoken; so, in fact, if there be such a 
difference, the interpreter must think first of these 
circumstances as they influence first its literary form, 
and then of those conditions which attended the 
spoken words. It seems highly probable that the 
attendant conditions would not be the same in both 
instances. y) 

The evangelist understands that most. of the 
hearers were poor,“ that many were lame, blind, 
deaf, dumb, or crippled in various ways,” some were 
of unsound mind, (possessed with demons), and all 
doubtless were oppressed by excessive tax-levies, 
to which the publicans added what they could,** 

4411. 5b. ; 

4 11. 4f.; 4. 23-25; 9. 2, 27ff., 32. . 

4 Matt. 9. 36. The translation of this passage in most versions 
is too complimentary to the Jewish authorities. The people were 
subject to exploitation, compare Mark 12. 40. They were victims 


of social injustice and hence were heartily Stace abn yo and without 
adequate religious leadership. 


88 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


and the common people were Hepes generally by 
the upper classes. 

It is to be assumed that any address made by 
Jesus would first of all have his immediate hearers 
in mind. And it is as necessary to assume that any 
address of Jesus in its literary form a generation or 
more later would have both hearers and readers in 
mind. It is fair to suppose, then, that in its present 
literary form the Sermon on the Mount is likely 
to perpetuate much of the original form of expression, 
at least in so far as the express statements of the 
context demand. 

The opening of the discourse alludes to con- 
ditions recently viewed by Jesus,*” and presented 
in the multitude of 5.1, who had come from far and 
wide,*® thus the mention of the “poor,” “they who 
mourn,” the hungry and thirsty, and the “perse- 
cuted.” 

Certain it is that the physical aspects of hunger, 
mourning, oppression, care, even “anxious care” 
for the daily bread, characterized Jesus’ audience, 
not only on one occasion, but many. 

It might well appear ironical to speak to such 
people of the coming ‘“‘Reign of God,” yet it is 
directly affirmed of the “poor in spirit”? and of the 
“persecuted” that ‘theirs is the Kingdom of hea- 
ven.” 

“How is it possible to think of a Reign of God 
under such circumstances as these?’ must have 
been the substance of questioning among many 


47 Matt. 4. 24. | ; 

484. 25 says, “from Galilee, Decapolis, Jerusalem and Judea, 
and from beyond Jordan.” 
Sten malts LO; 


89 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


who heard Jesus speak those words of promise.” 

The answer of Jesus to such questioning is found 
in the pericope usually called the Beatitudes, which 
is correctly described as a composite portrait of one 
who, in spite of circumstances that appear in them- 
selves to militate against such a Reign of Right- | 
eousness, Is eligible to its happiness. Just as an 
introduction to a well-wrought address gives in a 
comprehensive way the thought of the whole, so 
the Beatitudes and the sayings about “‘salt” and 
“light” assure the readers that the highest type of 
ethical progress and its satisfaction (“happy”), 
may be compatible with human circumstances. 

To paraphrase this pericope:*! 

The Reign of God is a practicable moral 
program for such men as these peasants upon 
the hillside, many of whom have a very re- 
stricted mental horizon. It may be said, 
vividly, that the happiness of such a social 
order is theirs, as it is, indeed, for all, even the 

_ afflicted, whose sorrow marks their faces, yet 
which cannot obstruct the inevitable comfort. 
Even a man who is by nature no user of force, 
one of a class who scarcely dare to claim any 
right as theirs, is happy indeed, for within the 
new order the promise of a rich inheritance 
will be made good, as no forcible taking or 
insistent demanding could bring it about.” 
There are, indeed, the hungry and thirsty 
now, who do not receive at once the water and 


© The term “kingdom of God”’ is practicall synonymous with 
that used chiefly by Matthew, “kingdom of heaven.’’ Compare 


the expressions, ‘‘God bless you!’’ and ‘‘Heaven bless you!”’ 
5. 3-16 


8 “Inherit the earth”; see Deut. 4. 22 and Lev. 20. 24. 


go 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


the loaf, but no longing for right and good will 
be denied. Men may be under the very sway 
of God and still experience untoward things, 
but the fuller coming of the Reign of God will 
correct even the outward, economic ills. A 
man who knows best the meaning of that 
“Happy” of the Old Testament beatitude will 
in the new era be a man of merciful turn of 
mind, right in his attitudes, pure in his thoughts, 
seeking peaceable relations between himself 
and others and among his brothers. Such a 
character will warrant the very expectation of 
seeing God, for such men are the very “sons 
of the Father!”’ 

Men of such character, like salt, are a syn- 
onym for wholesomeness and life. Their lives 
stand for all that is vital and vitalizing. Like 
light, the men of the kingdom shed a radiance 
upon the way of others. That way which 
their lives illuminate leads to the upper levels 
of life. The light of their worthy deeds at- 
tracts men, not to themselves, but to God, 
under whose sway they live. 

In this introduction to the Sermon the First 
Evangelist has without doubt made use of genuine 
teaching of Jesus, even though he has adopted a 
literary form and outline which is original with 
the writer. A comparison of the Third Gospel, with 
any harmony of the Gospels in hand, will assure 
the student of this. The evangelist thinks of the 
immediate disciples of Jesus as the auditors, at 
least at the beginning, for Jesus goes into the moun- 
tain to avoid the multitude.’ At the close of the 


ol, ae 


gI 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


discourse, however, the ‘“‘multitudes’’* were present, 


leaving the reader to visualize the gradual assem- 
bling of the many who could reach the retreat of 
Jesus and his disciples, and others would be visible 
to the hearers who themselves could not hear. 

Whatever the exact historical situation, the . 
evangelist, in his literary expression of Jesus’ funda- 
mental moral precepts, makes it very plain that 
human conditions as they were found in Jesus’ 
time were rot considered by the Master as cause 
for exclusion from the sway of a new morally sound 
social order which he was inaugurating. On the 
contrary, these untoward conditions were acting 
as the incentive to bring in the new order as quickly 
as possible. 

In summary upon the Tiisoduetionh to the Ser- 
mon, it should be pointed out that in Jesus’ mind, as 
the evangelist understood him, the field of moral 
endeavor is the world of men as it is. All are called 
but all do not qualify. Jesus has begun the in- 
struction of certain men whom he particularly 
addresses under the metaphors of “‘salt”’ and “‘light.”’ 
He promises here no riches, not even absence of 
physical want; he promises no high position in 
government, no degree of authority over their weaker 
fellows, nor does he propose national preeminence 
for Israel. The advantages that connote the “hap- 
piness” that shall be theirs are couched in what 
are usually termed “spiritual terms.” But. the 
terms of the evangelist do not thereby connote 
remote fulfillment or supernatural staging of a 
happy existence. As far as one can see, Matthew 


“7. 28. 
Q2 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


reports words of Jesus that assure the evangelist’s 
contemporaries of the possible Reign of God within 
and among them, a reign not so much outwardly 
organized as it would be outwardly and inwardly 
salutary. 

Many of the hints in this introduction® find 
exposition in the following portions of the Sermon. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. Find and report upon as many causes as possible of 
the distressing economic conditions of Jesus’ time. 
2. To what extent and in what way is sanitation a moral 
measure? 
. Find as many instances as possible of beatitudes in 
the Old Testament. 
4. Does ‘“‘Blessed” (““Happy’’) in the beatitudes signify 
that Jesus taught that happiness was an end in 
itself? Define “beatitude.” 


W 


THE SERMON ON THE Mount: RIGHT-NESS THAT 
SURPASSES THAT OF THE CONTEMPORARY 
SYNAGOGUE TEACHING 


Jesus was not an accredited rabbi. Not long after 
he began his public ministry, there is reason to be- 
lieve, he was refused the use of Jewish synagogues 
to teach. This compelled outdoor activity. In 
any event, Jesus would have been compelled to 
teach out of doors because of the larger number 
that attended his ministry. 

The Sermon on the Mount represents such out- 
door instruction, and it is probably no accident 
that the First Evangelist places at the beginning 
of the discourse Jesus’ defense against the charge 


Matt. 5. 3-16. 
93 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


that had been made (implicit in 5.17), that his 
teaching was destructive. From the evangelist’s 
point of view, the Sermon is apologetic to a certain 
degree. To paraphrase Matthew, 5. 17-20: 

You are far from right in supposing that I 
teach contrary to the law or the prophets. On 
the contrary, I love these scriptures and I 
would have them utterly fulfilled. I am my- 
self fulfilling them, in the sense that I am 
seeking to make their real meaning plain. 

In the Kingdom of heaven it is the man who 
brings forth the truest meaning of these ancient 
writings, and teaches this meaning to his fel- 
lows who is really a worthy man. But how 
many try to belittle or misteach what the 

_ prophets taught so plainly! If in any particu- 
lar teaching I seem to depart from the teaching 
of the synagogues, look into the writings them- 
selves and see whether the scribes themselves 
have not erred. Of a truth, I declare to you 
men of the present that you must possess and 
express a character, a morality, that surpasses 
that of these professional teachers, if you are 
to be worthy to be included in the Reign of 
God. | 

This statement on the part of Jesus might well 

provoke the question which is implicit between 
verses 20 and 21: “What do you mean by a morality 
that surpasses that of our professional teachers? 
Are they not our scribes?® or, again, Can you not 
explain further what you mean by “‘righteousness 


* &The term “scribe” meant to Jesus’ contemporaries, “teacher 
of religion,” or ‘‘a man instructed in traditional truth,’’ hence 
the force of their remark that Jesus did not teach ‘‘like the scribes.” 


94 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


that shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees’? 
Verses 21-48 of chapter 5 contain im extenso the 
‘further exposition of this ‘exceeding righteousness,”’ 
with illustrations from the law and other parts of 
the Scriptures. 

In the expressions, “Ve Hive heard)” and’ ‘It 
was said,’®’ are recognized conventional formulas 
which introduce a quotation from Scripture. In 
each one of these places where Scripture is quoted, 
one finds Jesus’ own statement of the truth in the 
matter. He asserts an authority at least equal 
to that of the Scripture in question, and in the 
understanding of the evangelist, no scribe could 
claim greater insight than Jesus exhibited. 

But this in no way urges to the conclusion that in 
every case Jesus set his own view over against that 
of the law and prophets. As in the case of oaths,*® 
Jesus may, indeed, set the scriptural statement 
aside, but again, as in the case of two quotations 
from the Decalog,°® the Master offers an exegesis of 
the words which, so far from opposing the com- 
mandment, brings out its real meaning, which con- 
temporary instruction had overlooked. 

Withal, the evangelist is extremely in sympathy 
with the view expressed by Jesus’ hearers, and no 
doubt it was heartily believed in Matthew’s time 
that Jesus ‘‘taught with authority, and not as the 
scribes.’’® 

This exposition of the “exceeding righteousness,” 
in brief paraphrase, reads:* 

There is an old commandment, with penalty, 
that reads: Do not kill. Yet I assure you that 


| 95. 21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43. | 5. 33-37. 95. 2uff., 27ff. 
AD x 29. $1 Matt. 5. 21-48. 


95 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the same penalty is valid for the angry attitude, 
yea for the hateful or contemptuous epithet. 
Do not suppose that you can worship with 
acceptance when quarrels or dissensions exist 
between you and your fellow man. The “ex- 
ceeding righteousness” of which I spoke involves © 
recognition of this great truth, and a practice 
in harmony with it. 

Another commandment says: Do not commit 
adultery. But the scripture also forbids all 
that leads to adultery. The lustful gaze is not 
without its guilt. It is worth the most drastic 
measures to’ keep the fountain clear. The 
body is less than the life. The old law about 
divorce had not so much truth in it as the 
scribes suppose. Beware of making a wife an 
adulteress, or involving another man in sin, 
by easily divorcing a woman, unless, indeed, 
it be on serious moral grounds. 

Consider the old word about oath-taking! 
It is better to cancel than to observe this saying 
as is customary. The demands of the “ex- 
ceeding right-ness’” are such that one is not 
obliged to recommend his honesty by an appeal 
to Deity. The moral character of a man of 
the Kingdom is such that his straightforward 
statement suffices. Do not use oaths: express 
yourself simply. 

There is one ancient saying which has in it 
such a wrong principle that it must be replaced 
in the new order. This is the law of retaliation, 
an eye foran eye, a life fora life. This rule serves 
to bring out the vicious and must be superseded 
by a positive law of nonresistance. Do not insist 


96 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


upon your rights for selfish reasons. Better be 
defrauded, better go twice the legal distance, 
than give place to destructive motives. The 
“exceeding right-ness”’ of the new order cannot 
be developed under any regime of revenge. 
Last and most important of all, the sur- 
passing character is so patterned after the 
known generosity and kindliness of the heavenly 
Father that the possessor of this ‘“‘exceeding”’ 
worth may be called a ‘son of the Father.” 
But this involves the use of standards not 
usually praised, nor popularly espoused. Love 
the unlovely; pray for your persecutors; not 
waiting to see whether they love you first, or 
greet you first. This is the essence of the 
Father’s attitude toward men. Such is the 
surpassing righteousness of the Kingdom. 

The command, ‘Thou shalt not kill,” is quoted 
with entire approval. But within the new ethical 
community all that contributes to a murderous act 
will be closely guarded. At no place in the Sermon 
is it more plainly stated than here that in the thought 
of Jesus, as the evangelist sets it forth, all behavior 
is conditioned by the set of the mind. Certain 
emotional attitudes, deliberate plotting, cherishing 
tabooed emotions all determine the set of the mind. 

No brotherhood can safely exist upon merely 
formal precepts. The brotherhood of the Kingdom 
is based upon a spiritual discipline. 

Jesus’ exposition of the higher righteousness 
emphasizes the right of the family to exist as a 
worthy Kingdom institution. The morality of the 
community is, in fact, conserved by the preser- 
vation of the family’s purity. Jesus’ illustration 


97 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


taken from family ethics makes plain his view that 
the Kingdom of the heavens, in Matthew’s phrase, 
in actually at home upon earth. For this same 
evangelist quotes Jesus to the effect that in the 
after life no marriage is known.” 

Thus, in the moral program of men and women 
among whom the sway of God prevails, even ‘“‘mental 
adultery” will be inhibited. For by the very con- 
stitution of the Kingdom, there cannot exist un- 
challenged any clearly defined inclination to an 
unfilial or unsocial act. The evangelist, however, 
does not assume that all who are actually within 
the Kingdom maintain rigidly at all times this strict 
discipline. Unhappily, there may happen even 
such impurity in act as to warrant the divorce of 
the untrue member, possibly in the interest of the 
group.* 

In the pericope, 5. 33-37, the First Evangelist 
teaches that the oath, as currently practiced, was 
in fact immoral. ‘‘Swear not at all,” said Jesus. 
To utter words that obscure or misrepresent the 
real personal attitude is immoral. Casuistry had 
flourished in the time of Jesus through convenient 
formulas, cleverly constructed, but the Master 
taught, in the passage under discussion, that the 
integrity of the person under the sway of the Father 
would be such that no formula of appeal could sur- 
pass in effectiveness the plain Yes or No. Oaths 
minister to no social security; they actually give 
rise to misunderstanding and wrong, hence are 
moral outlaws. 

In the ancient law of retaliation, human nature 

8 Matt. 22. 30. 

*§ But see discussion of Divorce, pp. 184ff. below. 


98 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


found itself so thoroughly intrenched that it praised 
the emphasis put upon it by the contemporary 
teacher. But this law was and is psychologically 
and sociologically wrong. In any community where 
the law of tooth for tooth, life for life, prevails 
there must ensue a high development of the ugly 
and animal in behavior. The law of retaliation is 
utterly unsuited to become a constructive com- 
munity rule. 

Jesus deliberately substituted, according to this 
evangelist, for the ancient and revengeful law, a 
rule of nonresistance. This is a constructive rule, 
in that it tends to develop those finer qualities which 
the law of retaliation would suppress. Through its 
adoption as a community rule, all would doubtless 
gain in happiness. By its adoption on the part of 
some only,“ the disciples of the older law might 
gain some material goods from those who prac- 
ticed the non-resistance rule, but the Teacher would 
say that the life is more than its nourishment and 
the body itself is more than the clothes that adorn 
it. It is yet to be demonstrated that all material 
loss is real loss or that all material goods won are 
real gain. Whatever the immediate consequences of 
Jesus’ rule of nonresistance, it is clear that it is 
morally constructive, personally disciplinary and 
empowering. In plain words it says: The righteous- 
ness that surpasses that of the contemporary 
teachers of religion adopts a procedure which reen- 
forces the moral power of the community, even if 
some material loss is met by the individual. For 


. “The Kingdom is assumed to exist within communities where 
all are by no means its citizens. Hence social relations between 
those who are within and those who are without. 


99 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


to insist upon one’s rights is subtly but surely to 
develop selfishness. And selfishness is alien to the 
spirit of the Reign of God. 

In the last illustration, 5. 43-48, the evangelist 
has found’ Jesus’ highest and finest appeal, as well 
as his most incisive statement of the higher right- 
eousness. It is, in reality, ‘becoming sons of the 
Father,” that is, partaking more and more of the 
Father’s nature. 

This pericope, 5. 43-48, not only constitutes the 
climax of the exposition in answer to the implied 
question, ‘“‘What is the exceeding righteousness?”’ 
but it furnishes a key to the understanding of the 
Kingdom of heaven in the milieu of the first-Gospel 
writer. The Kingdom is a program of moral 
advance, in which men engage while they are 
citizens of this world. God himself is ethical in his 
attitude toward men, as the prophets made clear. 
He is not revengeful, else men had perished off 
the earth. Among men it has been normal, con- 
ventional to hate the unlovely, to requite damage 
and discourtesy, but the community suffers from 
such practice. In the effective, constructive moral 
community the surpassing test of cooperation is 
that of one’s ability to imitate the Father and thus 
demonstrate the possession of filial nature. Filial 
nature is expressed in filial conduct. All men 
engaged in such high moral achievements are becom- 
ing more and more sons of the Father. The climax 
of the high appeal of this section reads: “‘Ye there- 
fore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is 
perfect.” 

6% The verb here (5. 45) is properly translated ‘‘become,’’ not 
““‘be,’’ as in most versions. 

100 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


. How should the ethical teaching of this chapter in 
Matthew be summarized? 

. What evidence is found in this part of the Sermon to 
indicate that Jesus broke summarily with Judaism? 
Is there evidence tothe contrary? (See Assignment 8 
p. 87.) 

. In what way did Jesus become familiar with the con- 
temporary teaching of the scribes? 

. What is the teaching of Mark as to the “authority”’ 
of Jesus? 

. Gather together the data in this chapter (Matt. 5) 
which show that in the evangelist’s thought the 
Kingdom is to be on earth. 

. Find and report upon characteristic instances of Jew- 
ish casuistry. 

. What other commandments from the Decalog might 
Jesus have used to illustrate the ‘‘higher righteous- 
ness’? Point out the line upon which one of such 
commandments might have been used. 

. In what way, if any, does the law of the present day 
take cognizance of a criminal intention which is 
not carried out in deed? 


9. Judging from your knowledge of psychology, what 


would be the practical effect of a policy of non- 
resistance which should be adopted unanimously by 
the Christian group in a given community? 


THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT: 
SOCIAL EVIDENCES OF THE REIGN OF GOD 


The sixth chapter of Matthew treats of that 


phase of ethics taught by Jesus, which the evangel- 
ist interprets as social, and as evidential of the 
‘moral life that is bound up in motive, attitude, and 
intention. 


IOI 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


On the one hand,® there are conventional forms, 
which are rooted in experiential values. Philan- 
thropy, prayer, and fasting may, indeed, exist as 
forms, but the love of needy (even if unlovely) 
fellow men, the instinctive desire and impulse to 
commune with God, interest, and even absorption ~ 
in any high endeavor are accompanied by if not, 
indeed, induced by ‘the spiritual attitude which 
deprecates ostentation. Much of religion in its 
formal observance becomes thus ethically con- 
ditioned. . 

On the other hand, within the social order, prop- 
erty and material wealth of many kinds have real 
values. What effect. upon these values will the 
Reign of God have? The new order is quite obvi- 
ously of this world, for it is bound up inextricably 
with human activities. The answer of Jesus” 
involves the direct influence of the Kingdom upon 
the use of these material things and their necessary 
subordination to other values, those of personality, 
of character development, which attention to the 
material has too often obscured. But just as 
surely as the Kingdom has its place in this life of 
men, so surely has the Kingdom a policy in regard 
to wealth, economic processes, daily sustenance, 
and the conservation of the citizen’s peace of mind. 

A paraphrase of the chapter® will present these 
two aspects of the Reign of God in its social evi- 
dences: 

The essence of acceptable philanthropy is 
to be found in the love of men rather than the 
love of publicity. In the Reign of God the 


6. 1-18. 6. 19-34. % Matthew 6. 
102 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


love of one’s brother is a compelling mo- 
tive. 

Prayer, in the Kingdom, is a personal relation, 
not designed to attract public attention. It 
is the Father who hears in secret, not the 
public, which may be impressed but super- 
ficially, who completes the relation involved 
in prayer. Pray for men, not to men. Not 
many words, but a deep-felt need, constitutes 
a rewarding prayer. | 

Pray to your Father, for the progress of the 
Kingdom program. He knows your daily 
needs. But your other needs do not forget, 
your need of the filial spirit in dealing with 
your fellowmen. 

Fasting is customary, but too often per- 
functory. Even if you fast entirely in secret, 
washing your face and combing your hair, the 
community will still know, through your ear- 
nest service, rather than through a disheveled 
appearance, that you are a son of the Father. 

Do not.amass that kind of wealth that is 
subject to deterioration; but discern and amass 
values that are not subject to corruptive 
influences. For your greatest interest will 
lie in that realm where your most highly prized 
possessions are. As the proverb has it, gen- 
erosity is like a good eye that lights the body. 
Use material goods so that they will be a con- 
structive force, for otherwise, as the proverb goes, 
your eye is evil, and all is darkened, obscured. 

It is a true principle that divided allegiance 
is impossible. Your chief interest cannot be 
placed upon competing objects. So these two 


103 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


kinds of values, material and personal, are 
mutually exclusive. | 

In view of all this, I assure you that the son 
of his Father will not suffer need. Food, 
raiment, housing—these are all needful for 
you in this life, and the Father does not for- | 
get your needs. Within the Kingdom, anxious 
thought and fretful worry are unfilial and 
alien. Even nature is cared for abundantly. 

The pagan and materialist think first of 
things, but in the new order the Reign of 
God comes first, with its ‘“‘exceeding right- 
ness.” Material things take their place, but 
it is a subordinate place. 

Live a day at a time. If it is unfilial to 
worry about to-day’s need, surely no son of 
the Father will borrow trouble in advance. 

In summing up the ethical teaching of Matthew 
in the two parts of this chapter, the student will 
note that the bond between ethics and religion is. 
indissoluble. Whether on the side of religious 
observance or on the side of a correct estimation 
of community values, the new order taught by 
Jesus is ethico-religious. 

The cup of cold water given to a man in need is 
philanthropy. The act gains nothing if it is cleverly 
staged to attract public applause. On the contrary, 
the exhibition of self-interest may bring to the 
merciful act a serious depreciation. The souls 
surprised by their award at the great assize,® 
cried out incredulously, ‘‘When did we see thee in 
need and ministered to thee?’ When the phil- 





6 Matt. 25. 37. 
104 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


anthropist loves his fellow more than the applause 
of the crowd he is indeed letting his other hand go 
on its way unknowing. 

Merely formal prayer lacks ethical value. How 

shall the community be lifted in any way if the 
one who prays thinks only of his own elevation on 
a wave of publicity? Secrecy in prayer is appro- 
priate, not for its own sake, but because invited 
publicity invalidates the prayer itself.” 
_ In the formal exercise of fasting the evangelist 
finds a striking illustration of the tendency to 
superficiality, ostentation, and negation of con- 
structive value. Men who ‘“‘disfigure their faces, 
to put on the appearance of fasting,’’”! even if they 
actually go through with the self-denial, thereby 
preempt all possibility of efficiency in any social 
reaction. ‘‘Truly indeed, they are receiving their 
pay.’ <A reward that consists of the satisfaction 
of even a religious vanity is quite empty of ethical 
value. 

But a deep-seated interest in moral endeavor or 
any constructive task involving community or 
personal service is fasting indeed, accompanied, as 
it often is, by self-deprivation of leisure, of amuse- 
ment, of luxury, or food. 

In the last part of the sixth chapter,” the subject 
changes from the inner spirit of formal religious 
exercise to the spirit that actuates the worthy 
member of the new order in his estimate of mate- 
rial and personal values relatively. 


70 The Lord’s Prayer is offered by the evangelist as a model of 
the effective prayer. At this point it is not thought desirable to 
enter into its detailed exposition. 

16. 16, 7 Verses 19-34. 


105 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


No evidence is found to indicate the evangelist’s 
condemnation of wealth as such. He does not 
appear to understand that Jesus would banish 
material wealth. For not only Matthew, but all 
the evangelists seem to understand that Jesus | 
taught his disciples that the Reign of God was to 
be among men who live in the contemporary civil- 
ization and under current economic conditions. 
The teaching of Jesus which the First Evangelist 
presents here is that material values are inadequate 
as a chief dependence and they are perilous as 
objects of chief emphasis,’* while they are subor- 
dinate to other values which are designated figura- 
tively as ‘‘treasures in heaven,” yet which are very 
obvious to the discerning eye in the ethical com- 
munity. The evangelist knows that the ethical 
thought of his time took cognizance of the use of 
material things.” 

The Oriental expression for niggardliness or 
meanness is “an evil eye,’ and this, as well as its 
opposite, “the healthy eye,’ appears in an exhor- 
tation to generosity in Matt. 6. 22-23. Matthew’s 
understanding of the saying differs somewhat from 
Luke’s, but in this exposition the evangelist is 
probably reminded of his former remarks upon 
philanthropy,” and pursues the subject, possibly 


7 Note Luke’s method of teaching this, in his parable of the 
Rich Fool (12. 16-21). This man was not condemned because 
the generous attitude of God (Matt. 5. 45) had made his fields 
bring forth with unusual abundance, but Spar 2h the fellow could 
not see any other than material values in 

™1 Cor. 8. 8; Rom. 14. 14ff.; also for the hace church, see Acts 
2. 44-46; 5. 2ff. 

7% On the ‘‘good eye”’ see Prov. 22. 9, margin; on the “evil eye,” 
cranes 20. 15; Mark 7. 22; Deut. 15. 9; Prov. 23. 6; Sirach 14. 10. 


106 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


with an implicit question as to the use of wealth 
in mind. 

Thus the interpretation of 6. 22-23 to mean that 
the ‘‘exceeding righteousness’? comprehends an atti- 
tude and practice of generosity is in harmony with 
a view shared by all the Gospel writers, and is 
echoed in Matt. 19. 21, as well as in the places above 
cited. 

The law adduced in verse 24 is not arbitrary. It 
is based upon human nature as it is found. No 
man can serve two masters. The law is grounded 
in the essential unity of the person.” 

The conclusion of the chapter brings to discussion 
a practical question which is clearly implicit in the 
reader’s mind. The son of the Father lives in a 
sociological community and he is, as well, a member 
of that other community of those who, like him, are 
“becoming sons of the Father’ in the sense of 
higher development of the Father’s nature within 
them. This latter community is the Reign of God, 
or, as this evangelist has it, “the Kingdom of the 
heavens,” and is without the clearly defined lines 
of demarcation that the sociological community 
has. Will there not be, possibly, such a conflict 
between the demands of the two kinds of com- 
munity that the member of both will suffer? It 
is a fair question. The evangelist believes that the 
reader is entitled to its answer. And it may be 
that in the original discourse, Jesus spoke these 
words in about this order. 


7 That the principle was early discerned in the moral develop- 
ment of Israel is seen in the contest at Mount Carmel, 1 Kings, 
18. 21-24, when Elijah used the exhortation, “If Jehovah be God, 
then follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” 


107 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


The connective ‘“‘therefore’’ in verse 25 denotes 
that the assurance of the Father’s solicitous and 
ample care for his children,” is logically related to 
all that precedes. The high point in this passage 
is verse 33, ‘Seek first the Reign of God,” and the 
type of character that such a regime demands, and 
all else will follow. 

The flowers, the birds and the grass are illustra- 
tions of bountiful provision within nature. But 
within the personal realm, far more important than 
the lower orders of creation, the Father’s care is 
supreme. 

Character-building stands first. The body will 
fail at last, but a man is more than body. Some- 
thing outlasts the material, and that is, in Jesus’ 
estimation, eternally of worth. One’s needs are 
pressing, but one’s character is essential. Freedom 
from consuming care allows primary interest in 
moral endeavor, personal service, which in turn 
displace all those petty and often vicious worries 
which corrode not only this day’s life but the hope 
of the morrow. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What ethical ee can be found in the Lord’s 
Prayer? . 

2. What is a moral equivalent of fasting? 

3. From your study of the Sermon thus far, what do you 
conclude as to the evangelist’s attitude toward com- 
merce and finance as desirable elements in a Chris- 
tian civilization? 

4. What difference, if any, would the existence of organ- 
ized social work make in the First Evangelist’s 


78 Verses 25-34. 





108 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


teaching as to philanthropy? Were there any 
Associated Charities in the first century A. D.? 

s. In your own words state what you understand by the 
evangelist’s phrase, ‘“‘treasure in heaven.” Make 
your answer as specific as possible. 

6. What other conventional religious forms did Judaism 
have besides philanthropy, prayer, and fasting? 

7. Gather the data thus far presented in the Sermon 
about “reward.” Is the expectation of reward 
counted an important moral sanction? 

8. In what way does chapter 6 (Matt.) strengthen the 
view that the Reign of God is to be upon earth, 
among human conditions? 

9. Does the Sermon thus far indicate whether the King- 
dom is to be nationalistic or universal? 


THE SERMON ON THE Mount: 
RECIPROCITY WITHIN THE NEW ORDER 
OTHER PRACTICAL TESTS 


The first twelve verses of Matthew 7 present the 
evangelist’s exposition of the principle of reci- 
procity between fellow members of the Kingdom, 
with probable application to those “without.” In 
presenting his views upon reciprocity he has quoted 
Jesus upon judgment or criticism of one another, 
and this leads to further details as to moral judg- 
ments which the members of the Kingdom must 
make.” ‘This, in turn, suggests words current in 
the church tradition regarding the Last Judgment,” 
following which the Sermon is concluded with the 
illustration of the two builders. Verses 13-14 
form a transition from the ideal rule of reciprocity 
(the Golden Rule) to the details of discriminating 


79 7, §5-20. $0 7, 21-23: 
109 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


judgment. The verses themselves are taken, as 
indeed is true of practically all the Sermon, from 
the relatively large number of Jesus’ words that 
had come down fo the evangelist’s time in various 
ways and in different combinations. The admo- 
nition of 7. 13f., “‘“Enter in at the strait gate,” 
is probably suggested to the writer by his use of 
verse 7, ‘Knock and it shall be opened.” 
A paraphrase of verses 1-23 follows: 

Critical judgments are infectious and at the 
best result but in measure for measure. Many 
such judgments are made blindly, and in any 
event conduce to no progress. Helpful judg- 
ment is possible if one make sure of the right 
spirit. 

Some judgments are truly necessary, and 
those who themselves see clearly refrain from 
incongruous mingling of highest values with 
lowest. 

In the Kingdom there prevails a real spirit 
of reciprocity, so ask and receive, strive and 
attain, knowing the generosity and good will 
of the Father, who knows so fully what to give 
to his children when they ask. 

In the spirit of this higher reciprocity, and in 
denial of the spirit of captious criticism or 
even condemnation, look about you and after 
the measure of your own desire, your own 
need, which your Father so bountifully supplies, 
do you impart to other men in like generous 
measure. This rule of the Kingdom is in 
reality the spirit of the Jewish morality as 
found in the law and the prophets. 

But the new order of society, the Reign of 


IIo 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


God, in which such surpassing reciprocity rules, 
is not easily entered. The gate is not wide, 
one must indeed seek and knock. But it is 
the narrow gate that leads to life, the broad 
and apparent way that leads to loss. 

If one must take such care then, there will 
be those who pretend they are under the Reign 
of God but who are not really of that com- 
munity. For it is the inner nature that vali- 
dates the life, not an assumed exterior. 

Judgments must be made, the false prophet 
avoided, the good tree recognized by its whole- 
some fruit. 

Tests are made at length, when the inner 
nature, however concealed for a time, must 
appear plainly. If the wolf in sheep’s clothing 
deceive the community for a time, yet his 
hypocrisy is open to the Judge of all men. So 
the Kingdom is not a‘rule according to appear- 
ance, but a rule founded on transformation 
of character. 

The question is bound to be asked by those who 
are learning of the new order: Who is within and 
who is without? What are the tests of membership? 
The seventh chapter of Matthew contains some 
answers to these inquiries, and some elaboration of 
the tests involved. 

Some preceding words may have left the impres- 
sion in the disciples’ minds that in the exercise of 
a policy of non-resistance they are to become passive 
in their attitude toward those “without.” But 
here the disciples are instructed, the evangelist 
says, in the mode of moral judgments. Judgment, 
as such, leads to retaliatory judgment. As in 5. 


art 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


36ff. retaliation was shown to be a destructive com- 
munity force, so here, blind judgment leads to a 
vicious circle of condemnatory criticisms. But 
there is a necessity for making positive moral 
judgments, for instance, as the disciples shall go 
out upon their various missions. 

Matthew writes in a time when the ‘“‘false prophet” 
was probably a distinct. menace, hence the special 
advice®! in his case, in further exposition of Jesus’ 
words: “Do not judge lest you yourself be judged.” 
The swine and pearls of 7.6 represent a moral judg- 
ment which the disciple must make. These are 
constructive as all laws of the Kingdom guarantee. 

Judgment, then, may be actuated by different 
spirits. The spirit of the son of the Father guar- 
antees constructive judgment, but that spirit needs 
itself to be constantly put to the test. Perhaps 
all the evangelists felt the force of this, for®® at 
times the disciples themselves showed such inap- 
titude in making judgments as to merit rebuke 
from their Master. 

All judgment that is constructive must be made 
according to the inner law of the Reign of God. 
This law involves the nature of the disciple, which 
is the nature of the Father. “Not every one who 
says to me, Lord, Lord, . . . but he who does 
the will of my Father.” The evangelist does not 
need to repeat here what he has said about gene- 
rosity toward those who are froward and about 
loving the unlovely. But this is the standard for 
the Father’s behavior and can be alone the standard 
for the son. 


“7.115. * Mark 9. 38-41; Luke g. 4of. 
If2 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


Consult human nature again, he says in substance, 
and discover that it waxes strong in its less lovely 
aspects when fed upon revenge or upon return in 
kind. If critical judgments are made which are 
first of all based upon inadequate knowledge (the 
mote and the beam), and in addition are ill-motived, 
this will but set up a train of retaliatory acts of cen- 
soriousness. The Kingdom program is constructive, 
hence no son of the Father will judge thus. 

Moral distinctions do not in consequence lie in a 
gray haze. The same English word “judgment” 
describes these desirable acts of discernment. The 
expression twice adduced by the evangelist, “By 
their fruits shall you discern them,’ is a hint to 
the disciple to look below the surface, to scan 
motive behind action. 

The climax of the pericope is found in the verse 
popularly known as the Golden Rule: “Therefore, 
everything which you would have men do for you, 
do you yourselves for them; for this is the law and 
the prophets.”’ 

“Therefore” indicates logical deduction from the 
preceding, hence it is correctly taken as the supreme 
statement of the kingdom-principle of consideration 
for others. It does not close the discussion of 
reciprocity, for there are particularly the illustra- 
tive sayings in 7. 15-23, but verse 12 is nevertheless 
the conclusion. | 

The specific teaching of 7. 1-12, as Matthew 
arranges the material, is that men of moral insight 
have this in common, that an unselfish or altruistic 
mode of looking at things provides a motive for 
interest in and consideration for the affairs of one 

837. 16, 20; compare I2. 33. 


113 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


another. This high motive finds its way into the 
human view from the Father, who is himself generous 
and kind. The principle is withal rational and 
constructive, thus justifies itself. A man who has | 
such insight and experience tends to measure his 
service to others by his own estimate of his desire 
and need. Selfishness in this way suffers a certain 
check by becoming a measure for its own undoing. 
And the older Scriptures uphold the principle, for 
it is the teaching of the law and the prophets. 

The evangelist will resume his discussion of moral 
criteria in the Kingdom in verse 15, but before 
doing so, quotes a short passage of two verses* 
concerning the two gates, one narrow, leading “‘into 
life,” which forms the antithesis of “destruction,” 
into which leads the ‘‘roomy way” of verse 13. 

Verses 13-14 have the same imperative form that™ 
is found in verses 1, 5, 6, 7, 12, and 15, so finds itself 
in no way out of harmony with the character of 
adjacent sayings. As is frequently the case in the 
Sermon, the statement of a high principle seems to 
suggest to the writer certain possible questions in 
the ‘minds of his readers, which he will answer 
in so far as he can anticipate them. Upon the 
announcement of the Golden Rule, one of the highest 
points in the Sermon, the implicit question seems to 
be: Is this a practicable rule? or, How can one 
expect men to measure so high? 

The admission of the evangelist is: It is indeed 
high, but there are words of Jesus which make 

% Luke 13. 24 uses this saying in quite a different context, where 
it appears much more at home. This, however, does not release 


the interpreter from the task of finding, if possible, the sense of 
the saying in the context of the First Evangelist. 


114 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


answer: The program here set forth is not easy. 
The way of him who would become competent is, 
to use a common figure, entered by a narrow gate. 
This requires effort and search on the part of all 
who enter. 

To the evangelist it appears as though the few 
would make this effort, while the many would take 
the obvious way. Later Christian writers have 
made similar statements. 

The connection of verses 13-14 with the following 
passage seems difficult to trace. Verses 15-23 
further illustrate the possible instances of moral 
judgments that meet the disciple. But throughout 
the pericope, 7. 1-23, including verses 13-14, the 
principle of antithesis is so abundantly used as to 
unify the thought somewhat. 

The chapter, thus far, reveals the evangelist’s 
understanding of Jesus’ moral program in certain 
practical particulars. The program involves a high 
consideration for others, on the part of each member 
of the community. There will always be give and 
take in life, but the way of selfish regard is not the 
way of community-building nor of character-build- 
ing. Temptations to relax diligence in such a pro- 
gram are pictured in the figure of the way of least 
resistance. The new program is, after all, the old 
brought into new perspective, for the law and the 
prophets really taught the same principle. 

The Kingdom is not coextensive with the in- 
habited world, although it is of the world that now 
is. There are “false prophets,” ‘“‘corrupt trees,’ 
“thorns,”’ “‘thistles,”’ and “‘ravening wolves.” These 
antitheses, however, guarantee the validity of the 
good tree and its fruit, of the path that really leads 


115 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


to life, though that life be conceived of as the life 
that men should live together in this world. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What instances can be found in chapter 1o (Matt.) 
where the disciple is called upon to make moral 
judgments? 

2. Is the Golden Rule specific or general? If only a 
form, how can content be put into it? 

3. Do you find evidence in this chapter that the King- 
dom is thought of as outside the inhabited world? 
Is there any evidence to the contrary? 

4. Point out a practicable way in which the Golden Rule 
could be used in making a treaty at the close of a 
war for conquest. 


SUMMARY OF THE ETHICAL CONTENT OF THE 
SERMON ON THE MOUNT 


The conclusion of the sermon, Matt. 7. 24-27, 
is in the form of a parable: 

Two men propose to build. One of these 
is not farsighted, is anxious to realize upon his 
efforts, cannot imagine the rise of other than 
present conditions, hence does not expend 
much labor upon the foundation, which, after 
all, is not a very visible part of the edifice. But 
the storms, floods, and other destructive forces 
become impartial judges of his work. _ He 
loses. 

His counterpart is a builder who foresees 
untoward conditions, who calculates shrewdly, 
who counsels with men of experience, and 
compares his own experience and observation 
with theirs. His building rests, therefore, upon 
a solid foundation, either well chosen or labo- 


116 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


riously constructed. The storms, winds, and 
other forces of nature leave him secure after 
their test of his work and he congratulates 
himself upon his consistent plan. His house 
becomes his secure residence. 

The lesson is not left to the deduction of the 
reader. For the evangelist quotes the words of 
Jesus: “Every one who hears . . . and does, 

shall be compared to a wise man.’”*® 

But the man who built for the time being, for 
appearance, optimistic, and perhaps saying jauntily, 
“The house appears secure, it will stand!” is de- 
clared to be like the foolish man. He lost his 
labor. | 

The lesson of the Two Builders applies to the 
entire Sermon in its present literary form. It is 
reading too much into the parable to say that it 
teaches the loss of asoul. For herein the conclusion, 
Jesus is more conservative in his statement than in 
5. 22, where the man who calls his brother a fool 
incurs at least the risk of Gehenna. 

Jesus has in mind the man who is evangelized. 
This man has heard the good news of the imminence 
of the new order. Practical principles of character- 
building, of community redemption, of conser- 
vation of life, of discernment of values, of social 
amity have been set forth before him. This evan- 
gelized man, this instructed soul, is irrational 
indeed if he chooses the lesser values, if he desires 
no permanency of fine character, if he forgets the 
vision. | 

The concluding illustration contains more than a 


9. 24; 
t77 


” 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


hint of the important principle expounded within 
the discourse, of the unseen but potent springs of 
action that make valid the outer life of a man. 

Any summary of the Sermon on the Mount — 
should be cast in the personal form rather than in 
abstract terms. In its literary form as it stands 
the Sermon retains much of the force and pictur- 
esqueness of the spoken address. The man, and 
not the multitude, was in the eye and thought of 
the speaker, as Matthew has brought the discourse 
to his readers. This “man of the Sermon” is of 
course the ‘‘wise man” of the conclusion. He is 
the composite character of the Beatitudes, the con- 
testant who enters the lists against the “scribes 
and Pharisees” with the ‘‘exceeding righteousness” 
as his goal. He is the “‘son of his Father in heaven” 
at least potentially. He is “becoming” a son. 
This man belongs to the community where religious 
forms have often been empty, but he now cherishes 
the form the more because it has been enriched in 
content. It no longer needs to be public, for the 
spirit of service is more than the conventional 
form. This man knows more about values than 
he knew before. He understands that the greatest 
values are most enduring, not corruptible, but yet 
they are not as obvious as the much sought but 
temporary and corruptible values. This ‘‘wise 
man” knows too that the Reign of God guarantees 
the bountiful care of the Father, who knows what 
the son has need of before a petition is offered. He 
trusts the Father who anticipates his wants and 
achieves a peace and satisfaction of mind which 
enables him to put his chief efforts upon the day’s 
work. Such a man will deal sympathetically, 


118 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


kindly, generously with his fellows, for his example 
is the Father. He will not be irrational in his 
passivity, but he will not be unbrotherly in any 
aggression. He will not put emphasis upon his 
own rights, which may become his_ brother’s 
“wrongs,” nor will he engage in any activity that 
will encourage the growth of selfishness. Better 
suffer wrong than to be wrong. Thus, retaliation 
and revenge offer broad avenues into the field of 
selfish ends. But to enter this field at all is but to 
deny development to the unselfish and altruistic 
motives. This, in turn, will make a man a nega- 
tive or even destructive force in his community. 
No social redemption through any selfish program! 
He sees that if all men become thus champions of 
their own rights, if they develop cunning in obtain- 
ing their rights, plus all that a selfishness, easily 
excited, will demand, the community will serve 
as a prey to the long-headed plotters, and the com- 
munity will be exploited, not redeemed. The wise 
man sees too that the spoils of the strong in this 
case are not enduring values to them, for the final 
parable of the Teacher shows the loss of that short- 
sighted man’s work. It is the wise man, after all, 
who, though he is laying up for himself ‘‘treasure 
in heaven,” is himself the greatest asset the com- 
munity of men here on earth has, for he represents 
and wields the real power to redeem human society. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. What appropriateness is found in the selection by 
Jesus of the story of the Two Builders? Cite other 
gospel stories about building. 

2. Compare the form of the concluding parable in Luke 


119 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


6. 48f., and state any differences you find in literary 
effectiveness and in application. 

3. How closely are standards of test and promise of re- 
ward related in the Sermon? How does this com- 
pare with modern ethical thought? 

4. Does Jesus, according to Mark and Matthew, seem to 
imply that the immoral man owes his immorality 
to some “‘inner spring’’? 

5. Make an attempt to formulate the teaching as to 
ethical salvation as found in the Sermon. 

6. How do modern writers on ethics estimate and grad- 
uate motives? Consult Martineau, Types of Etht- 
cal Theory, Vol. ti, p. 266, for his Table of Motives. 
Also note criticism of same in Sidgwick: The Meth- 
ods of Ethics, p. 369. Does Jesus appear to indicate - 
any such gradation? 

7. What distinction can be made between the strictly 
Jewish ethics and the strictly Christian ethics 
represented in the Sermon? 

8. Can you classify the ethics of Matthew in chapters 
5-6-7 as social? as individual? If divided, which 
predominates? 

9. At the conclusion of your study of the Sermon on 
the Mount, offer your statement of its theme. 
(Compare p. 87, Assignment 1.) 


THE NORMATIVE POWER OF THE INNER LIFE 


If behavior (conventional practice) within the 
community made up of those who are seeking to 
realize the best in life is to be constructive, con- 
servative of personal values and weaving all the 
strands of public and private interests into a real 
brotherhood, how is this to be attained? Two 
ways at least may be thought of: (1) the imposition 
upon the community of a predetermined standard 


I20 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


of ‘conduct, through some form of agreement; or 
(2) the attainment of a relatively uniform standard 
of conduct which is itself determined by the indi- 
vidual’s possession of chastened desire, high aims, 
disciplined impulses, and, in general, a thought-life 
rather free from unworthy elements. According 
to the First Evangelist, Jesus takes the second 
alternative.®” 

Without theorizing, Jesus is represented as ex- 
plaining to the disciples in chapter 15 of Matthew 
some words which he has just spoken to the reli- 
gious leaders, in the person of certain Pharisees. 
The power to produce an ethical behavior of effective 
and constructive standard is the spirit of a man, 
itself under the power of a controlling force other 
than the man himself but closely identified with 
him. The teaching is not new in chapter 15, for 
it appeared in the Sermon on the Mount. A para- 
phrase of the address in brief form will set before 
the reader its essential teaching: 

In a conversation with the most exacting 
traditionalists of Judaism one day, the latter 
complained to Jesus that his disciples ate 
without the proper ablutions, thus setting an 
example of contempt for established custom.® 

Jesus countered by saying that certain estab- 
lished customs themselves showed contempt 
for the original Word of God, and quoted from 


8? Mark also understands that Jesus emphasized the normative 
power of the thought-life. See Mark 7 and compare Chapter 2, 
pp. 23-25, above. 

% Matt. 15. I-9. 

89 The Pharisees and their scribes were by far the most severe 
in their interpretation of the law. For an early Christian estimate 
of this, see Acts 26. 5, ‘‘the strictest group.” 


I2.i 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the prophet Isaiah to the effect that hundreds 
of years before substitution of tradition for 
revelation provided a superficial morality, of 
which the prophet justly complained. 

Then Jesus turned from these particular 
controversialists, and addressed the people as 
follows: 

The matter in dispute is really simple. Real 
evil comes from an evil mind, not through 
ceremony. These food laws are not moral 
laws. No moral deterioration comes from 
without. : 

The disciples spoke up: Do you _ know, 
Master, that the Pharisees seriously mistook 
your meaning? Yes, said Jesus, they do not 
see, for they are blind leaders. They cannot 
stand the test of life. Whereupon Peter said: 
We, at any rate, would like to understand the 
matter. Jesus replied: It is food that enters 
from without, and this is digested and dis- 
posed as nature best knows how. But think 
of the evils that can come out of a man, all 
that arise from evil thoughts, all the sinful 
deeds known. Compare the defilement of these 
evils with an unwashed hand at table!” 

As in Mark 7, this discourse is given before Phari- 
sees, the multitude and the disciples in order, al- 
though the disciples were of course, present from 
the first. It is essentially disciple instruction, as 
the Sermon on the Mount was understood by Mat- 
thew to be. Thus, in the evangelist’s exposition 
of the ethics of Jesus, this chapter contributes to 


© Matt. 15. I-20. 
122 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


the reader’s understanding of the ethical theory 
prevalent in the evangelist’s time.*! 

Jesus had already been in conflict with the Phar- 
isees over the Sabbath,” and this had given rise 
to a plot against him. On this occasion,” although 
these Pharisees were probably not the same (“from 
Jerusalem’’), they were not looking for instruction, 
while the disciples were seeking to know. Although 
one cannot be sure of the chronological order of 
events in any Gospel, in both Mark and Matthew 
this instance of teaching is placed very near the 
scene at Caesarea Philippi,** when Jesus was on the 
point of going to Jerusalem on his last fatal journey. 

The pericope represents teaching that had been 
presented before, but still the disciples had the 
conventional ethics of Judaism too plainly before 
them. Perhaps their awe of the contemporary 
official teachers was still somewhat in evidence, 
and they would thus be held under the influence of 
their authority. But these disciples had at least 
been courageous enough to follow Jesus’ example 
and cast off the shackles of the old custom. It 
was the Master’s protest against form as such, not 
against form that was expressed from inner enlight- 
enment. 

The words to the disciples are those of a serious, 
earnest man, penetrating below the surface of 
shallow and well-nigh superstitious moral in- 
struction, showing. his hearers that the life of men 


“Jt is certain that this theory of the inner norm did not orig- 
inate in the First Evangelist’s time, for it forms a part of the tra- 
dition that came to Mark, perhaps a score of years earlier. It 

bears marks of originality, genuine Jesus-teaching. 

12, I-13. 15. ff. 

*% Matt. 16. 13ff.; Mark 8. 27ff. % 15. 12. 


123 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


in its deeper and most real aspects is, in fact, the 
field of ethics, the arena of moral forces, the valid 
source of the good or evil in society. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. In what part of the Sermon on the Mount is teaching 
similar to that in chapter 15 (Matt.) found? What 
differentiates this chapter from the passage in the 
Sermon, (a) in content, (b) in clarity? 

2. What words of the Pharisees (Matt. 15. rff.) imply 
that Jesus was considered a regular member of the 
Jewish church? 

. What is meant by ‘“‘the tradition of the elders’’? 

4. Search through the addresses and sermons in the book 
of Acts and report whether the apostles incorporated 
the teaching of this chapter in their public exposition. 

5. After an examination of Romans 14, do you conclude 
that in the time of Paul (cir. 55) the teaching of 
Matthew 15 was current in the church? 

6. Compare the parallel passage in Mark (7. 1-23) and 
note differences. Is the ethical teaching the same 
in each case? Does the addition of Matthew’s 
“whatsoever enters into the mouth” (15. 17) make 
this a specific attack upon Jewish food laws? 

7. What is the particular evasion of the law referred to in 
Matt. 15. 5? 

8. To what extent do these words of Jesus (chapter 15) 
indicate that all traditional forms are unethical and 
to be abandoned? 


Ww 


Tue BROTHERHOOD OF THE KiNGpom: Its 
MUTUAL ETHICAL RELATIONS 


The eighteenth chapter of Matthew has been 
called the “‘Constitution of the Kingdom of God.”’ 
Within this chapter the evangelist has gathered into 
a discourse of 613 Greek words, interrupted only 


124 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW | 


once (verse 21) by a question from Peter, a number 
of paragraphs which he applies to the exposition 
of some most vital principles within the new moral 
order. 

He begins with the discussion among the Twelve 
as to who should be greatest,® which Mark had 
given in greater detail,” following Mark in the 
saying about offending one of those who believe, 
and in the figurative saying about cutting off an 
offending member,*® but with 18. 10, the First 
Evangelist adduces still other sayings to amplify 
his exposition. From the first Gospel, then, can 
be gained a fuller (and later) Christian view of the 
ethical community which its writer calls the ‘‘King- 
dom of the heavens.”’ 

The paraphrase of 18. 10-35 offered below will 
present the essential Matthaean features of the 
Christian brotherhood.” It will be recalled that 
in 18. 1ff. the narrative concerned the question of 
the disciples as to who was greatest in the Kingdom. 

Do not look down upon the little ones, for 
their spiritual relation with the Father is 
direct and open. It is not, after all, for the 
prominent, but for the neglected that the Son 
of man serves. A simple tale will illustrate 
this: 

A man with a hundred sheep, one of them 
lost, will place his thought and effort upon the 
one that has strayed. The Father does not 
ask about the “‘great’”’ alone; he will not have 
the “‘least’’ come to grief. 


% 18, 1-5. 7 Mark 9. 33-37, see above, pp. 20ff. 
% Matt. 18. 6-9; Mark 9. 42-48. 
8? The student should recall the substance of footnotes 34 and 


36 on pp. 30-31 above. 
125 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


So. between you within the Kingdom; make 
every effort to keep your relationships amicable, 
for otherwise you may lose a brother. Be 
not easily discouraged if your attempts at 
reconciliation fail, get help from others, even 
from all the other brothers. Then if he per- 
sists, he will number himself among those 
without. 

All the relationships between men of the 

_ Kingdom on earth are ratified with the Father. 
Thus your responsibility is infinite. 

Another very important truth lies in the 
effectiveness of united effort, of united purpose. 
Two thus united have prevailing influence 
with the Father. Every united company of 
believers in the world have also my company. 

Then Peter asked how patient one should 
be with a brother who tested one’s patience 
frequently. Peter suggested seven times as a 
possible measure. But Jesus multiplied that 
again, not by seven, but by seventy, without 
further comment, except to relate a story, as 
follows: 

The Kingdom is comparable to the king who 
examined the accounts of his servants, in par- 
ticular with two of them. ‘The first owed him, 
it seems, such a sum that he could never pos- 
sibly pay it. So the law was invoked and an 
order given to sell him and his family in pay- 
ment of the debt. The debtor made such an 
effective plea, however, that his lord’s sense 
of personal loss was changed to mercy and he 
actually forgave the man all his debts. There- 
upon the forgiven debtor hunted up a man who 


126 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


owed him a ‘small sum and insolently demanded 
full payment. All this debtor’s prayers availed 
not, and he was cast into prison. When the 
report of his unmerciful act reached the king, 
however, the mercy of the latter turned to 
strict justice and he cast the fellow into prison 
to remain indefinitely. Jesus closes his story 
with a statement that the Father also would 
requite men who did not find it in their hearts 
to forgive their fellows. 

It should be noted that this teaching is late in the 
life of Jesus, as the evangelist places it after the 
Transfiguration and just before the last journey to 
Jerusalem. It is disciple-instruction, as most 
of the teaching of Jesus in this Gospel is. 

‘The words are clearly thought by the evangelist 
to constitute some of the parting words of Jesus 
with the Twelve as to their program after he should 
leave them. Note the mention of the Master’s 
presence with them,’”' where even “‘two or three are 
assembled.” Their program will continue ‘‘on 
earth’ and the relations of amity and cooperation 
between them would be chief among the elements 
of their success. In the evangelist’s day he could 
look back upon many instances which verified 
tiise 

The ethical substance of the address is clear. 
The Reign of God is evidenced in the company of 
those who comprise its membership by relative 
unanimity, absence of discrimination against the so- 
called “least,” that is, the less prominent, and every 


ane wh ply 10 £8. 20. a ES. 18.710. 
ote Acts 2. 1, 46f.; 4. 32a; 1 Cor. 1. 10; Eph. 4. 25b; and 
Mastas passages that reflect conditions in the Christian community 
before the first Gospel was written. 


127 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


typical member of the community will make unre- 
mitting efforts to maintain relations of amity with 
all other members. This attitude has its sanction 
in the attitude of the Father toward his sons who 
compose the community. 

According to this address, it is possible, in fact, 
inevitable that differences will arise,’ and that the 
trespassing brother may even apostatize.% All 
the normal conditions of human society are reckoned 
with, yet the policy of the Kingdom is to seek to 
modify those conditions, until the relations between 
men in the Kingdom and without stand out in con- 
trastao 

Nothing has been adduced by the evangelist to 
instruct one in detail as to Jesus’ theory of the inner 
moral nature, excepting the outstanding passage 
concerning the gradual development of men into 
“sons of the Father,’ and the frequent assumption 
of the filial relation. That there was a theory of 
spiritual relation to or union with Jesus himself in 
the Christian community before this evangelist’s 
time is known from the letters of Paul and others. 
It does not appear to be Matthew’s purpose so 
much to discuss the theory of the disciples’ relation 
to the Father and to Jesus as to state it, for ex- 
ample, in such a manner as 12.50, ‘‘Whosoever shall 
do the will of my Father in heaven, the same is my 
brother and sister and mother.”! 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 
1. Note the relative number of instances in this chapter 


1418. 15; compare 5. 23; 18. 21. 

e938. 57, 106 5. 45-48. 

107 Matt. 5. 45. 108 6, 4, 6, 9, 14; 18. 15, “brother.” 
109 Compare above p. 71f. 


128 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


where Jesus says “my Father” and ‘‘your Father,” 
compare this with usage in the Sermon on the 
Mount. What inference can be drawn? 

2. Find the story of the lost sheep in Luke, parallel to 
18. 12-14, and indicate what, if any, difference there 
is in its use and teaching. 

3. Write a paraphrase of 18. 1-9. 

4. In what way does 18. 15-17 explain the application 
of 18. 21-22? Detail the social application of this 
principle in the community best known to you. 

5. What new note in the teaching of Jesus does 18. 35 
introduce? Does it introduce any inconsistency 
with Matt. 12. 17-21? Do the two passages refer 
to the same person? Are both original with Jesus? 
May not one or both be adduced by the evangelist? 


THE NATIONALISM OF THE FIRST GOSPEL 


The first Gospel agrees with Mark and Luke that 
at some point during his Galilean ministry Jesus 
sent twelve of his disciples out upon a mission which 
involved a proclamation of the coming Reign of 
God and also service on the part of the “‘apostles’’ 
which was distinctly social in nature. 

The ground of this mission, in Matthew, is to be 
discovered in 9.36f., namely, in the great pity that 
Jesus felt for the “‘exploited’”’ and ‘‘unshepherded”’ 
people whom he saw on every hand. Into this 
piteous and plenteous harvest he asked that the 
disciples pray the Lord to send laborers, which 
prayer they themselves answered in part by going 
into the villages of Galilee, healing diseases, re- 
storing unbalanced minds, and proclaiming the 
near approach of the Reign of God. . 

Thus the mission of the Twelve arose out of a 
social need and theirs was a much needed task in 


129 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


social service. The recognition of social neglect 
and lack of adequate and sympathetic leadership 
among the peasantry of Galilee is a distinct ethical 
note in Matthew 10. The term “lost sheep’’! 
gets its content from 9.36, thus meaning “neglected,” 
or ‘‘without adequate social guidance and organiza- 
tion,” rather than ‘‘lost”’ in a theological sense.‘ 

Since the proclamation of the nearness of the 
Kingdom was an element in the social service of 
the Twelve,'” the evangelist appears to identify 
healing and exorcising as part of the moral reno- 
vation implied in the coming of the Reign of God. 
In the economic stress which was an oppressive 
feature of life in Galilee, it would be indeed a pos- 
itive element in social reconstruction if men hitherto 
dependent upon the bounty of the community be- 
came wage-earners as a result of the loss of their 
infirmities. This, of course, was not the extent of 
the missionaries’ activities. ‘The unselfish example 
of the disciple, trusting to the providence of God!® 
and to the hospitality of the community which he 
served,' would beget other unselfish service. 

’ The diagnosis of Jesus was not that of an enthu- 
siastic optimist. He saw in the villages and cities 
inhospitable people who would not give a proper 
reception to one doing good,’” and he compared 
the disciples to ‘sheep in the midst of wolves,’ 
while some of the ‘‘wolves’”’ were identified as men 

110 Compare Matt. 18. 12-14. 

11 The term “neglected” is ‘perhaps too weak to express just 
what the evangelist states. The student will recall that Mark 
(12. 38-40) found a teaching of Jesus, given at Jerusalem, which 
involved the scribes in practices comparable to the ‘“‘flaying’”’ or 
“exploiting’”’ of the people in Galilee, as Matt. 9. 36 has it. 


S10: 7. _ M3 Matt. 5. 25-34; 10. 29-31. 14 10. Of. 
US TO, 14. US T0.°16.) 


130 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


who would actually persecute and even kill the 
missioners.!’ Jesus’ own consciousness of a social 
prophet’s lot told him that the earnest disciple 
would share his own fate.’ 

The evangelist has gathered material for a dis- 
course of some length, addressed to the Twelve as 
they were departing upon their mission. The 
whole of chapter 10 is taken up with this discourse, 
and the paraphrase following will indicate not 
only the particulars above recited, but will exhibit 
the strong nationalistic attitude held by the First 
Evangelist toward the work of Jesus. Data from 
other parts of this Gospel easily corroborate this 
statement. The address to the apostles, however, 
strikes the keynote of such a nationalism as pre- 
vailed within the Jewish-Christian communities 
of the first century. 

After calling the attention of his disciples to 
the distressed condition of many of the Jewish 
people in Galilee, Jesus took twelve of his 
followers, Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, 
Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James, son 
of Alpheus, Thaddzus, Simon of Cana, and 
Judas Iscariot, and sent them out upon a 
mission, with directions to restore the sick and 
mentally deranged and proclaim the coming of 
the Kingdom. 

“Do not take any road that leads toward 
Gentile people,” said Jesus, “and enter no 
Samaritan city. Your mission is to the lost 
sheep of the house of Israel. 

‘Take no abundant provision for your needs, 


UF'¥0; 17; 19,-28: US't0. 24; 
131 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


neither money or clothes in reserve. Depend 
upon the hospitality of those whom you serve. | 
And if you find inhospitable people, or if any 
refuse your service, let them take the respon- 
sibility and bear the consequences of their 
act. I assure you, theirs will be no light 
penalty! 

“This indicates that all men will not be 
friendly. You will even be brought into the 
courts and be scourged. But you will find 
yourselves unusually well equipped: for defense, 
for the Spirit of your Father will in reality be 
the advocate. 

“Even then, you may be brought to death. 
But the death of the body is a lesser calamity 
than to be disloyal. So fear indeed anyone or 
any power that can bring your soul into dis- 
honor. To deny me, to prove unfilial indeed— 
this is to be feared. Be always assured of the 
Father’s solicitude and care for you, for he 
watches over even the sparrows, worth so little 
in comparison with a man! | 

“It may be you will be called upon to sever 
family relations, but even here loyalty to your 
mission comes first. He who would prove 
worthy of me must deny himself all things that 
would turn him from his path, yes, he must 
even take his cross upon his shoulders, signi- 
fying his devotion even unto death. 

“So I send you forth, to depend upon the 
bounty that you may receive. It will be the 
reward of a prophet and he who receives you 
will. not lose his reward.” 

A strictly nationalistic note is struck at the open- 


132 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


ing of the discourse. The directions given would 
keep the apostles within Galilee. They are to go 
into no road leading to foreign cities and into no 
Samaritan city. The note struck here is quite 
characteristic of this evangelist, as evidenced by 
his insertion into the story of the Syrophcenician 
(Greek) woman!’ the saying, not found in Mark 
7. 24-30, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of 
the house of Israel.’ Throughout the first Gospel, 
much stress is placed upon the close relationship 
of Jesus to the Jewish people, as 2. 2, “King of the 
Jews”’;”° 8. 11, “they shall sit down with Abraham, 
and Isaac, and Jacob in the Kingdom of heaven’’;”! 
Ig. 28, promise that the Twelve “‘shall sit upon 
twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” 
21. 4f., Jesus hailed as fulfilling the prophet’s word, 
‘““Say to the daughter of Zion, Lo, thy King cometh 
towthee.”’ 

The evangelist’s strong Jewish sympathies are 
noted in other ways, vividly, for instance in the 
many instances of fulfilled prophecies, where the 
fulfillment satisfies a specifically Jewish hope, as 
Mra alogie Saris yt 356 SON SOs aT. oO: 

Further evidence of the nationalistic leaning of 
this writer is found in his version of the Markan 
account of Jesus’ visit to the heathen regions where 
lived the Greek woman whose persistence brought 
healing to her daughter. In Matthew 15. arf., 
Jesus goes to the boundaries of Tyre and Sidon, 


19 Matt. 15. 24. 

120 Compare 27. 11, Jesus’ affirmative answer to the question of 
Pilate, “Art thou the king of the Jews?” 

131 Compare less Jewish manner of expression, Luke 13. 28f., ‘‘they 
shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob...and they shall recline 
in the Kingdom cf God.” 


133 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


but the woman ‘‘comes out’ to him, thus leaving 
a clear impression that Jesus did not enter heathen © 
territory. 

Mark 7. 24 states with no ambiguity at all that 
the woman went into a house where Jesus had 
taken refuge, hoping to remain incognito. In 
his revision of the narrative of Mark, Matthew 
seems deliberately to conform Jesus’ words to the 
woman to his own nationalistic restrictions.’ 

Other evidence is scarcely needed to show that as 
far as the First Evangelist was concerned, the mission 
of the Twelve, like the mission of Jesus, was for 
Jewish people and Jewish proselytes alone. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLAss REPORTS 


1. To what extent does the mission of the Twelve in 
Matthew support the Jewish view that the King- 
dom of God was essentially a regime of material 
good, economic reform, and Jewish supremacy? 

2. What aspects of economic betterment appear in the 
Kingdom of God as seen by Matthew? 

3. Trace the use of the term “sons of the Kingdom” 
throughout the first Gospel and note any variation 
in meaning. 

4. Matt. 21. 43 represents Jesus as threatening that the 
Kingdom shall be taken away from the Jewish 
people. What historic fact known to the evan- 
gelist does this unique saying reflect? 

5. What interpretation did the Twelve actually put upon 
the saying of Jesus in Matt. 28. rof.? Consult the 
book of Acts. What one or more of the Twelve 
attempted any foreign mission? Compare the form 
of the Great Commission found in Acts 1. 8. 

6. Was the ethics of Judaism nationalistic or otherwise? 


122 Matt. 10. Sf. 
134 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


Consult J. M. P. Smith, The Moral Life of the He- 
brews; and H. G. Mitchell, The Ethtcs of the Old 
Testament. 

7. Does the First Evangelist strengthen or weaken his 
nationalistic view of Jesus’ mission when he quotes 
Jesus’ words, 8. 10? 

8. Can one successfully justify a nationalistic ethics in 
the present time? 


ETHICS AND RELIGION: A STUDY OF THE 
RULING CLASSES IN JUDAISM 


An unbiased reading of Matthew 23. 2-39, a 
discourse containing 638 Greek words, much of which 
either has no parallel in the other Gospels, or con- 
tains the same matter in other words, or is expanded 
by the writer,”*® leaves the impression either that 
the First Evangelist was sure that Jesus despaired 
of winning the ruling classes to his following, or 
that the Master publicly denounced the scribes 
and Pharisees in very striking terms of invective, 
or else that the First Evangelist himself has col- 
lected, arranged, and edited words of Jesus in such 
a way as to exhibit the attitude of the Christian 
Church of his time toward these leaders. 

Acts 15. 5 and the entire story of Paul reveal 
the existence of a considerable number of Pharisees 
within the church during the forties’ whose prestige 
was such that they influenced the policy of the 
church in certain directions. Notwithstanding this, 


123 The following verses in Matthew, 23.2, 3,5, 7b, 8,9, 10, 15-22, 
24, 27b, 28, 31, have no parallel in Mark or Luke. Other pas- 
sages, as 23. 13, 23, 25f., 38, and others, contain significant words 
added by the First Evangelist, for example, “scribes,” “‘hypo- 
crites,”’ desolate” (the last with some textual doubt); which 
points to editing of the material by the evangelist, or to some other 
source. The latter is not as acceptable an hypothesis. 


135 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


it must be admitted that the Pharisees and the 
scribes on the whole were immune to the appeal . 
of Jesus. It must also be admitted that the total 
character of the first Gospel indicates that its 
writer was not sympathetic with the liberal tendency, 
as it would appear to him, of Paul and other propa- 
gandists who carried the gospel to Hellenists, but 
would rather side with the Pharisees of Acts 15. 5, 
who appear to have carried much of their conserv- 
atism with them when they entered the Jerusalem 
church. : 

There is therefore an adequate demand for a 
study of this chapter (23) of the first Gospel with a 
view to ascertaining the thought of its writer about 
the ethics of the leading teachers and religious 
classes, as well as his view of the relation between 
ethics and religion. Previous writers upon moral 
themes within Judaism had laid stress upon the 
fundamental character of religion as a sanction for 
and guarantee of a moral life."* Many of the 
reported words of Jesus likewise stress the close, 
well-nigh indissoluble relation between religion and 
morals.“ Thus the First Evangelist would be 
expected to follow other Jewish writers in demand- 
ing of religious men not only the performance of 
regularly appointed religious services but also the 
possession of moral integrity which should appear 
in their public and private life. 

The following paraphrase of Matthew 23. 1-39 
will set before the student this evangelist’s under- 
standing of Jesus’ arraignment of the strictest of 








124 See J. M. P. Smith, Moral Life of the Hebrews, pp. 137f.; 247; 
esp. 319. 
1 Mark 12. 38-40; Matt. 7. 21ff.; 5. 23f., and many other passages. 


136 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


the religious leaders as to their fulfillment of his 
expectation. 

Jesus addressed the people and his disciples 
thus: “The scribes and Pharisees took pos- 
session of Moses’ seat. Where their teaching 
plainly is of the old moral law, follow that, 
but do not imitate these teachers in moral 
practice. Their teaching and their lives do 
not correspond. They are publicists, doing 
ostentatious things, devising burdens for others 
but avoiding the same themselves. They plan 
to get prominent places and to be called com- 
plimentary names, such as Father, Teacher 
and Master. 

‘“‘As for you, my followers, seek no such 
titles. You have one Father, the heavenly 
Father, and Christ alone is Master. It is 
strange, yet true, that he who seeks exaltation 
must yield to him who honestly and modestly 
hides his goodness. 

“T have a number of charges against the 
scribes and Pharisees, namely, that they stress 
nonessentials in their teaching, and that they 
live lives that misrepresent a true morality.” 

Then, apostrophizing these religious leaders 
and teachers, Jesus said:’”° 

“Alas, for you yourselves are not entering 
into heaven and you prevent others from 
entering in. 

“Alas, for you pretend by all means to bring 

1% The evangelist does not record any answer of the scribes and 
Pharisees to this terrible arraignment, verses 13-36, and he def- 
initely says that the audience consisted of “the multitudes” and 


“disciples” (23. 1), thus the paraphrase takes a form that assumes 
the absence of the two classes described. 


137 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


men into blessedness but you actually so teach 
men that they become worse than yourselves. . 

‘“‘Alas, blind as you are, you make false dis- 
tinctions that seem real to you! Hairsplitting 
moralists! Dealers in casuistry! You teach 
men to evade the law, not to fulfill it. 

“Alas, for your painful attention to the 
tithe of garden herbs and your glaring indif- 
ference to justice, mercy and faith! To attend 
to one small duty and neglect many weighty 
obligations is like straining out carefully the 
smallest mite and blindly bolting a large mass. 

‘“‘Alas, for your moral example! The outside 
polished and fine, but within gorged with the 
results of extortion and graft. O blind Phari- 
see! The inside is more important than the 
outside. If you are clean within, the outside 
will become cleansed. 

“Alas, for your very reputation! Men be- 
lieve you are holy, judging from your pious 
veneer. Like whited graves, all bright without! 
But within! 

“Alas, that you are self-confessed. sons of 
those who murdered the men of God. The 
sepulchers of these martyrs you decorate indeed, 
but are preparing to send other martyrs after 
them! You are but repeating the history that 
you piously read!” 

Then, apostrophizing the city itself, Jesus 
said: 

“OQ Jerusalem, Jerusalem: A ruined habita- 
tion left to you, whom I would have cherished 
and whom I love! I go the way of all those 
prophets whom your pious men have stoned 


138 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


and killed, and you shall see me not, until that 
future coming! ‘Then men shall see aright and 
hail him who comes in the name of Jehovah.” 

As the discourse appears, it represents the result 
of literary assembling of sayings of Jesus, originally 
spoken upon occasions no longer traceable, but put 
together here after the plan of the evangelist, who 
seeks, in a long discourse, to represent Jesus’ atti- 
tude toward the contemporary Jewish teachers. 
The address may well express also the evangelist’s 
attitude toward the Jewish teachers of morals, as 
was suggested above. 

The most virulent part of the chapter comprises 
the seven ‘‘woes’’ spoken against the scribes and 
Pharisees. The paraphrase offers a modern state- 
ment of these ‘“‘woes,’’ using the term ‘alas’’!’ 
to express the apparent feeling of the speaker, who 
will not express a malediction but wishes, rather, to 
record his utter dismay at the “‘blindness”’ of learned 
men who fail to see the work of simple moral truths 
so often plainly expounded before them. The 
scribes and Pharisees are becoming lost on their 
way to life, their vision taken up with the casuistry 
of their profession and with the trifling and put- 
tering, dividing of mint,.anise, and cummin into 
tenths, while the great duties of service, gracious 
love of their fellows, and social justice await a 
faithful servant. 

To summarize the ethical teaching of Matthew 
23, then, the evangelist emphasizes the contrast 
between pious profession and moral performance. 
He discountenances ostentation in religious exercises 





127 See Plummer, Exegetical Commentary on Matthew, p. 3166. 


139 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


and scrambling selfishly for position, since these 
things usually indicate self-seeking rather than 
social love and service. 

The evangelist distinctly states that Jesus warned. 
his disciples against the assumption of titles and 
prerogatives for their own sake. He enjoins the 
humble spirit as the best safeguard against intol- 
erant and immoral egotism. 

The contemporary teachers are upon a road 
leading away from life. This road they blindly 
pursue. No hope really exists for them as a class. 
They proselytize but debauch the proselytes; they 
seek ingenious ways of evading vows, but in reality 
blaspheme God; they are intent on trifles and ob- 
livious to social duty; they appear holy, but are 
grossly immoral; they say they would never per- 
secute holy men as their fathers did, but they are 
now preparing to do even worse than they. 

In the judgment of the First Evangelist, the con- 
temporary teachers are not fairly interpreting the 
moral message of the past. It remained for the 
prophet of Galilee to do this for his generation. In 
opening to his people the fullness of the moral law 
and in showing them to the full a blameless moral 
life, Jesus had to come into fatal conflict with the 
traditionalists who blindly pursued their fateful 
way. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


“ 


1. To what extent are the ‘‘woes’’ of verses 13-36 sym- 
metrical in their literary form? Compare the dif- 
ferent English versions. Why was verse 14 not 
included in the American Revised Version? 

2. How widely are the parallels to some of these words 


140 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


scattered? Consult both Luke and Mark in the 
harmony of the Gospels. 

3. In what way, if any, do the seven woes of Matthew 23 
correspond to the Beatitudes of chapter 5? Com- 
pare Luke 6. 20-26. 

4. What correspondence do you find between the im- 
moral practices of the scribes and Pharisees in 
Matthew 23 and those of earlier Jewish or Hebrew 
people, as shown in Isa. 1. 1-23; Amos 5. 21—6. 6; 
Ezekiel 34? Find other Old Testament passages 
that reflect similar immoral conditions among the 
Israelites. 

5. State in modern social terms the particular moral 
problem or problems found in Matthew 23. 

6. Indicate some modern forms of casuistry. 

7. What particular ethical teaching in Matthew 23 is 
also found in the Sermon on the Mount? 

8. Who were some of the “prophets, wise men, and 
scribes’ of verse 34? Can you verify their fate 
from the Bible? 

9. Show whether chapter 23 is harmonious with the atti- 
tude of the Sermon on the Mount in regard to the 
Mosaic law. 


THE ETHICS OF THE FAMILY IN THE FIRST GOSPEL 


The thought of the First Evangelist is clearly 
based upon a monogamous theory of the family, 
and he tacitly accepts the conventional Jewish 
family ethics as the basis of Jesus’ teaching. 

John Baptist protests the legality of Herod’s 
marriage with his sister-in-law, Herodias, on the 
basis of Lev. 18. 16, and in the story of the Sad- 
ducees’ conversation with Jesus’? the evangelist 
assumes the current assent to the levirate mar- 
riage” while in the story of the Nativity of Jesus, 


1% 22. 236f. 129 Deut. 25. 5-10. 


141 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Joseph is “‘of a mind to divorce Mary his promised 
wife’? under suspicion, since betrothal in Jewish 
circles was as binding as marriage. 

In this Gospel Jesus quotes the Decalog’ with 
approval and thoroughgoing interpretation of the 
law against adultery, although here and in 19. 
3-12, the Master, according to Matthew, leans away 
from the provision for divorce in Deut. 24. 1-4 
insofar as it has been laxly interpreted, and agrees 
with the stricter rabbinical interpretation of his 
own day, that fornication only, and that on the 
part of the wife, is ground for divorce.'** 

The Jewish attitude toward woman is implicit 
in this Gospel, in that the wife has no right to 
divorce her husband under any circumstances, 
while Mark is influenced by Roman procedure 
in proposing the case where the wife divorces her 
husband. 

In the first Gospel Jesus makes two pronounce- 
ments upon the moral right of divorce. In each 
case’* a certain restriction is put by the evangel- 
ist upon the absolute negation of divorce. The 
restriction in each case concerns immorality on the 
part of the wife, ‘“‘except for fornication,”* ‘‘ex- 
cept for the case of fornication.” In some of the 
manuscripts these phrases read identically, but in 
the text most generally followed in English-speaking 
countries,° they differ as above noted. 

130 5. 27, compare Exod. 20. 14; Deut. 5. 18. 

131 The recent works on the divorce question by R. H. Charles, 
G. H. Box and others should be consulted. R. H. Charles, Teach- 
ing of the New Testament on Divorce, London, 1921. Box-Gore, 
et al., Divorce in the New Testament. 

12 Mark 10. 12. 


133 Matt. 5. 32 and 19. 9. 1459. 9. 15. 32. 
136 Westcott and Hort. 


142 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


Many have attempted to make plausible the 
theory that ecclesiastical hands placed this exception 
in the two Matthzan places, but all textual evidence 
goes to show that they are original. There is not 
a shred of evidence to contradict the view that the 
evangelist who wrote the first Gospel inserted the 
restriction. The question as to the originality of 
the phrase in either case with Jesus is one that must 
be deferred at least until the close of the present 
inductive study of the ethical teaching of the Gospels. 

The student will readily recall from previous 
chapters that the evangelist is portraying Jesus as 
the announcer of the Reign of God, and that in 
address, conversation, and parable the Master 
teaches chiefly his. own disciples the mode of life 
and character within that community of men and 
women striving for the most efficient moral-social 
order. . | : 
When Jesus defined the type of uprightness that 
should characterize the man of the Kingdom, he 
pointed out that he would do no murder if he checked 
the incipient hateful thought, that he would not 
commit adultery if he suffered no unsocial thought 
to develop within his soul. Thus, within the King- 
dom, it would surely be the normal thing for ideal 
marriage relations to prevail. Hence he could urge 
the essential indissolubility of the marriage bond; 
while it is also thinkable that exceptions would 
occur, even within the Kingdom. For'’ the evangel- 
ist finds warrant for supposing that a brother with- 
in the Kingdom might become stubborn in his 
refusal to become reconciled. In this case, separa- 


1st Matt. 18. 15-17. | 
143 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


tion from the community of those who conform to 
the law of the Kingdom is inevitable and necessary. 
Such separation protects the community from con- 
tamination from within. So in the Sermon on the 
Mount"** the evangelist again finds warrant for 
supposing that within the Kingdom a man may 
approach God with his gift and then recall that he 
has acted in a manner toward his brother which 
shuts him out from communion with the Father. 
In this case the evangelist assumes a reconciliation 
and the resumption of worship. 

From the foregoing consideration it would not be 
surprising if Matthew, perhaps on the basis of his 
experience in the early church, correctly represented 
Jesus as providing for actual cases of unkingdom- 
like behavior within the Christian family. Even 
if Jesus did not himself put the case in Matthew’s 
words, the Master offered analogies that readily 
justify the First Evangelist’s statement of his posi- 
tion. 

On the other hand, this evangelist offers sub- 
stantial teaching as to the mutual bearing of King- 
dom members toward each other, especially in 
chapter 18. Peter was to be ready to forgive an 
offending brother “‘seventy times seven,” the farm- 
hands were not to tear out with ruthless hands 
the darnel that grew with the wheat,’® for fear of 
injury to the grain. If one within the Kingdom 
who is not one’s wife commit some offense that 
rankles, and one go and talk it over with the offender, 
it may be that one’s brother will be won.'*° 

It is entirely in harmony with this program of 
Jesus as the evangelist has set it forth, that no 
ass 5. 23-24. 139 13. 29. me TSF 0 50. 


144 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


summary divorce action would be approved within 
the Kingdom. If an offending brother were worth 
an effort toward reconciliation, if his worth poten- 
tially warranted repeated forgiveness, if self-re- 
straint and perseverance on the part of the offended 
one were amply rewarded in the winning of a brother, 
surely the thought of the evangelist as well as the 
thought of the Teacher himself would be against 
such summary divorce proceedings as Hillel advo- 
cated,“! and would rather invoke the procedure 
of loving attempt to restore right relations and a 
right inner attitude on the part of offending wife 
(or husband either, as Mark would have it). 

The word used in Matthew’s exceptive clause, 
“fornication,” connotes repeated and _ deliberate 
immorality. As a practical measure, just as Paul 
had taught his congregations, before this Gospel 
was written,“* one who persistently remains un- 
faithful to any of the laws of the Kingdom has but 
one fate, that of exclusion. Such exclusion is not 
so much a judgment as it is a conservative measure. 
In such a regime, of course, the unfaithful married 
person might not remain with the faithful in inti- 
mate fellowship.’ 

The figure of the family is fundamental to Jesus’ 
exposition of the Reign of God. The family is 
designed to be the emblem and source of purity 
within the Kingdom. ‘Thus it is central in the moral 
thought of the Master and his disciples. 


141 This liberal rabbi interpreted the law of Deut. 24. 1-4 to 
mean that divorce might follow summarily upon any unhappy 
domestic event. 

1@3 Cor. 6.171. 

148 Compare Paul in 1 Cor. 7. 12-17; 5. 9-13, for practical church 
procedure in the Christian Church before Matthew wrote. 


145 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. Write a short sketch upon the Jewish attitude toward 
woman in Jesus’ time. 

2. Estimate the bearing of Hosea, chapters 1-3, upon 
the teaching of Matthew concerning family ethics. 

3. Report upon the varying interpretations of the Old 
Testament divorce law by Rabbis Hillel and 
Shammai. 

4. Compare the teaching of Paul upon family ethics with 
the teaching of the First Evangelist upon that 
subject. 

5. To what extent is Old Testament ethics a support to 
double-standard ethics? To what extent is this true 
of Matthzean ethics? : 

6. State what if any evidence exists in the New Testa- 
ment to show that the Christian community acted 
seriously upon the teaching upon family ethics set 
forth by the First Evangelist. 

+“. What evidence appears above to show that the King- 
dom is upon earth? 


REWARD IN THE FIRST GOSPEL AS A SANCTION 
OF MorAL ENDEAVOR 


The thoroughly Jewish character of the First 
Evangelist is betrayed by many of his selections of 
sayings, and perhaps never more clearly than in 
his use of teaching by the Master concerning reward 
for leaving all and following him, for faithfulness 
in service and for endurance “‘unto the end.” 

So often does the idea of reward occur in this 
Gospel that it appears desirable to examine this 
aspect of the evangelist’s ethics in a section by 
itself. The abundance of material dealing with 
reward, or, as the Greek expression has it, “pay,” 


146 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


3 


“wages,” has attracted the attention of interpre- 
ters of the Gospel.’ 

In many of the sayings about “reward,” either 
heaven is indicated as the place or the future the 
time of its award. “Great is your reward in hea- 
ven,” “you have no reward with your Father in 
heaven,’’*° “treasure up for yourselves treasures 
in heaven,’’*’ are specific references to ‘‘the heav- 
ens,” used by the evangelist in the strictly Jewish 
sense of the abode of the Father. 

The terms “eternal life,’? ‘““‘kingdom prepared for 
you,” and “‘in the kingdom of my Father’ are used 
in a sense that differs from that in certain instances. 
where “the Kingdom of the Heavens” or ‘‘the 
Kingdom of God’ is found upon the lips of Jesus 
when he is discussing mundane and not future 
events. Following are a number of these sayings, 
in which the reward indicated is in the future and 
in some cases certainly at the time of judgment at 
the end of the world, as held by Jewish apocalyp- 
ticists.1* 

“He shall be called great in the Kingdom of 
Heaven” (5. 19b), ‘“‘and your Father who sees in 
secret shall reward you” (6. 4, 6b, 18), ‘She who 

144 McNeile, in his commentary on Saint Matthew, p. 54, points 
out a number of these passages in the first Gospel which contain 
thoroughly Jewish terms concerning reward at the hands of God, 
and in addition notes that in some words ascribed to Jesus the 
Jewish idea is so transformed that he “really eliminates the idea 
of reward.’’ The student should follow McNeile’s suggestion in 
the above note and consult H. B. Swete, Apocalypse of John, p. 306. 

MB 5. 12: Gt Ts 18h 620: 

148 Tt is not practicable to enter into a discussion of apocalypticism 
in its history and various developments here, but the student 
should become‘ familiar with such works as Primitive Christian 
Eschatology, by E. C. Dewick; Articles in the Dictionary of the 


Bible, and such monographs as appear in the Symposium on Eschat- 
ology in the Journal of Biblical Literature, 1922, Vol. xii, pp. 102-182. 


147 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


finds his life shall lose it, and he who lost his life for 
my sake shall find it,’? “then the righteous shall 
shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Fa-_ 
ther,” better rendered, perhaps, “in the Reign of 
their Father,’® “‘when the Son of man shall sit 
upon the throne of his glory, you also shall sit upon 
twelve thrones, judging the while the twelve tribes 
of Israel,”®! and ‘“‘he shall inherit life eternal’? 
are characteristic passages that speak of reward 
in the future. 

The teaching of those portions of the Gospel 
which have been subjected to analysis thus far 
gives one a decided impression that in the mind of 
the evangelist. Jesus did not hold a brief for any 
form of selfishness or egotism. If, then, one is to 
assume that the teaching of Jesus is presented in a 
form believed by the Gospel writer to be consistent 
in every part, the reward held before the disciple 
offers indeed a hope of a better lot than the Master 
predicted in 10. 16-23, which hope may well nerve 
the apostle to “endure to the end.” 

Those who find in the language of Jesus the 
reflection of current views of the future are nearest 
correct. The evangelist himself is more in sym- 
pathy with that picture of the future which finds 
the faithful apostles upon twelve thrones, judging 
the twelve tribes of Israel, than the other Gospel- 
writers, who are more thoroughly under the domi- 
nation of Roman and Greek ideals. 

There is nothing to hinder the supposition that 
Jesus himself, a child of Judaism, as far as his reli- 
gious training is concerned, was thoroughly con- 


49 10. 39. 60 33, 43. 151 9, 28. 18 19, 29b. 
148 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


versant with the apocalyptic hopes of his people, 
and that he voiced his message in such terms as 
would appeal to the shepherdless and downcast 
sons of Israel and at the same time nerve his apostles 
to a sustained effort in their declaration of the good 
news that the Reign of God was imminent. 

Other portions of the Gospel also show clearly 
that the Master, in Matthew’s understanding of his 
message, emphasized personal, spiritual values as 
chief values, upon which the greatest emphasis 
should be placed. In the realm of the spiritual 
lie those rewards which are most enduring. ‘‘Fear 
not that man who can kill the body!” ‘‘Lay up 
those treasures which are not subject to corrosive 
influences!’ The characteristic note in Jesus’ 
promise of reward, in this Gospel, which empha- 
sizes it most, is also one with his note of emphasis 
upon the spiritual, enduring values in life. 

Reward, in Jesus’ thought, is not a quid pro quo, 
but it is that type of life itself which results from 
sustained moral endeavor. This is indeed a sanc- 
tion of moral effort. It is a rational use of the 
promise of rewarding fruitage in character. But 
it is true that for present-day readers the language 
itself seems to go beyond its real meaning. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CxLass REPORTS 


1. Can it be shown that the Matthean teaching as to 
penalties, for example, 10. 15; 11. 24; 12. 36; 13.30f.; 
15. 13; 16. 27b; 24. 48-51; 25. 41 and other passages, 
is couched in figurative Oriental imagery? What is 
the solid ethical teaching, then, under the imagery? 
2. What passages in Matthew indicate that reward will 
be in terms of the service rendered or good deed done? 


149 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


3. Paraphrase either 20. 1-16 or 25. 31-46, bringing out 
their moral teaching in modern terms. 

4. What evidence do you find in Matthew to warrant 
the conclusion that the evangelist wrote particularly 
to encourage his readers to persevere? What evi- 
dence is there against this view? 

5. In what sense do the Beatitudes hold out reward as a 
result of right doing? 

6. How is the term “reward” to be interpreted in such 
passages as Matt. 5. 46; 6. 2, 5, 16b; 10. 40-42? 

7. Which of the following passages contain promise of 

_ reward for right-doing: Matt. 6. 33; 7. ani to. rob; 
NTL VGSEt Qe art ac 28F 


THE MATTHZAN CONCEPTION OF THE REIGN 
OF GoD 


The name used by the First Evangelist for the 
new order announced and ushered in by John 
Baptist and Jesus, namely, ‘“‘the Kingdom of 
Heaven,’’** has been taken by some to indicate 
that the evangelist thought of the new order as 
superearthly, to appear at the end of this order of 
things and thus to replace the earthly with the 
heavenly. 

Such a view became very popular in certain minds 
several years ago and still persists as one interpre- 
tation of the Kingdom of God in the other Gospels 
as well as in-the first Gospel. But there appear 
excellent reasons to suppose that in the mind of the 
evangelist and of Jesus, the Kingdom or Reign of 
God was ‘“‘at hand” in a real sense for those unshep- 
herded and downcast Israelites who so aroused the 
compassion of Jesus as he looked over the Galilean 


168 Literally, “Kingdom of the Heavens.” 
150 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


hills. As for the name, the First Evangelist uses 
“Kingdom of God” in 12.28; 19. 24; 21. 31, 43,4 
and his favorite term, “‘Kingdom of Heaven,” is no 
doubt the exact equivalent of ‘‘Kingdom of God” 
or ‘Reign of God.’ 

Certainly there is nothing in the Matthean term 
to indicate that he thought of the new order as an 
extra-mundane community. The men of the King- 
dom functioned as ‘‘the salt of the earth,” and as 
“the light of the world,”’”® and their mode of main- 
taining brotherly relations’ assumed their prox- 
imity to appointed places and time of worship, as 
well as the presence in their environment of the 
smaller or greater exasperating factors of social 
intercourse,’® whereby their effective filial and 
fraternal relations were affected. Their acts of 
worship would be null and void as long as an unre- 
conciled breach existed between the worshiper and 
his brother, and Kingdom relations became unreal 
if another had provoked a quarrel which the ag- 
grieved brother refused to arbitrate. “Love your 
enemies”? is surely out of place if no enemies 
exist within reach, and the injunction to “lay up 
treasures in heaven” involves a person who has to 
be warned against laying up treasure “on earth,” 
where he is assumed to live. When Jesus quotes 
with approval from Hosea, “‘I desire mercy and not 
sacrifice,’ and urges men to go and learn what 

1544In some MSS. Ig. 24 reads “of heaven’’ and in some 6. 33 
reads ‘“‘of God.”’ 

1% Plummer: Exegetical Commeniary on Saint Matthew, p. 25, 
suggests that the form ‘Kingdom of heaven’’ more nearly meets 
the Aramaic original, but the other evangelists found their phrase, 
“Kingdom of God,” more intelligible to their readers, or less liable 


to misunderstanding. 
16 5, 13-16. 157 5, 23ff. 18 18. 15-20. Uae. 44. 


151 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


that means,’ and teaches that the giving of a cup 
of water ‘‘in the name of a disciple” is praiseworthy 
and rewarding, he assumes, in the understanding 
of the evangelist, that the principles governing life 
under the Reign of God are principles governing 
the lives of men who belong within a human envi- 
ronment. 

Further, Jesus stressed the imminence of the 
Kingdom, it was ‘‘at hand,’’*' and he makes vivid 
his declaration that the Kingdom has indeed sur- 
prised men by its coming™ if it be true that cures 
were wrought by the Spirit of God. - In Matt. 4. 
23-25 the threefold ministry of Jesus, ‘teaching 

proclaiming . . . healing,’ appears to be 
characteristic of the Kingdom as it was being estab- 
lished among men. | 

The Reign of God has, then, much to do with the 
life that men live on this earth, with economic, 
financial, sociological, and religious as. well as 
strictly moral affairs. The First Evangelist clearly 
teaches that the Reign of God applies to human 
beings under human conditions, even though, as 
also appears, he believes that this divine sway is 
destined to a most wonderful triumph in a future 
era. | 
Thus a future picture of the Reign of God is de- 
lineated by the First Evangelist, but the Teacher 
whether warning the unprepared that they will be 
excluded from its blessings’®* or holding before the 
disobedient or careless the necessity of exclusion 
of the unfit from the mature and harmonious society 


169 9. 10-13. 161 4. 17, 182 72, 28, 
163 25. I-13; 22. II-I4. 


152 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


of those who become sons of the Father,’ or, again, 
reminding his hearers that the coming of the King- 
dom will bring with it much repetition of moral 
history in Israel,’ or explaining the slow but cer- 
tain development of the new order among men by 
the use of familiar processes or occupations,’ is 
represented as setting forth fundamental principles 
of a practical moral community of men who heed. 

It is not alone in parables that this evangelist 
teaches his readers what he understands by the 
Kingdom of God. At the time of Jesus’ public 
appearance John Baptist was proclaiming to the 
people the imminence of the new era which they 
had been earnestly looking for as a relief from their 
want and distress, as well as a national achievement 
before all the nations. John was an ascetic type,‘ 
quite in contrast to Jesus. His message was.one of 
immediate repentance or summary judgment,!® 
not one of patient reconstruction of society. Mat- 
thew does not represent John as expounding the 
Kingdom which he announces, for preacher and 
hearers knew perfectly what its character was to be. 
Preparation for the enjoyment of this new era was,. 
according to John, “repent,” ‘“‘bring to light the 
products of repentance’ without depending too 
fully upon Abrahamic descent. The First Evangel- 
ist, unlike Luke,’ gives no detailed instructions 
to various classes as to their duties in the emergency, 
but baptizes all who obey his summons, thus doubt- 
less enlisting their cooperation as his disciples and 
coworkers for immediate reform. 


14 13. 24-30, 47-50; 25. 14-30, 31-46. 
18 21. 23-46; 22. I-10. Ae akon toe 31-32, 33, 44, 45f. 
3.45 01, 8, 18. 183. 2.10, 12. 8 Luke 3. 10-14. 


153 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Jesus indicates the contrast between his method 
-and John’s!” acknowledging that John was indeed 
his precursor, paying a high compliment to him 
as a hero of reform, yet scarcely admitting that 
John entered into the program of the Kingdom as 
Jesus himself set it forth. ‘“‘He that is less in the 
Reign of God is greater than he.’’"! The violent 
measures of the “‘forerunner’’ were not in any way 
adopted by the real prophet of the Kingdom, Jesus.” 

The parable of the leaven, which “‘a woman hid 

till’. '...'. “all was’ leavened,’’ in’ no* way 
corresponds to John’s simile of the ax lying ready 
to fell the unworthy tree, or of the winnowing fan, 
ready at once to separate the wheat from the chaff. 
To be sure, Matthew has Jesus use the very words 
of John in his opening message, “Repent! for the 
Kingdom of Heaven is near!’’!”? but in his further 
portrayal of Jesus and his teaching of the Kingdom, 
the First Evangelist indicates surely how wide a 
difference existed between the two men and their 
concept of the new order.” 

Aside from the teaching of the Sermon on the 
Mount, which cannot here be rehearsed, the choice 
of the teaching material in chapters 18 and 15 is 
sufficiently convincing of Matthew’s own concep- 
tion of a Kingdom that does not come by catastrophe, 
as many of his fellow Israelites believed, but, rather, 
of a new era inaugurated within the existing society 
of Jewish Christianity, in which mutual love between 
fellow members of the new community was war- 

0 Matt. 11. 11ff. eae & Hs GaN 

172 Tn the fifties, it appears from Acts 18. 24—19. 7, the John Bap- 
tist movement was parallel to but apart from the Christian “Way.” 


173 3. 2, compare 4. 17 
114 See ‘above, pp. +186, summary on the Sermon on the Mount. 


154 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


ranted and inspired by the nature and example of 
the Father of them all.” | 

What, then, of the aspect of the Kingdom gener- 
ally referred to as the apocalyptic? 

Matt. 8. 12 offers a unique use of the term ‘‘king- 
dom,” which is clearly eschatological. Its context 
is the statement of Jesus concerning the centurion, 
whose faith surpassed that of Israelites. Said 
Jesus: 

‘‘Many shall come from east and west and 
they shall recline with Abraham and Isaac and 
Jacob in the Kingdom of the heavens, but the 
sons of the Kingdom shall be cast forth into the 
outer darkness, and there shall be weeping and 
the gnashing of the teeth.’’!”° 

In one other place in the Gospel the term “sons 
of the Kingdom,” in explanation of “the good 
seed’? among which the tares (darnel) grew up, is 
used in quite another sense, if 8. 12 is to be inter- 
preted in an eschatological sense. For these ‘‘sons 
of the Kingdom” in chapter 13 are clearly men who 
live in an earthly environment. The parable of the 
Tares, however, possesses very apparent eschatolog- 
ical elements at its close. 

In 21. 43 Jesus threatens the Israelites who are 
described in the preceding parable of the Wicked 
Husbandmen with a withdrawal from them of the 
Kingdom of Heaven, that it may be given to a nation 
which brings forth the fruits of the Kingdom. 
Here the Kingdom can hardly be the future, apoca- 

7% 18. 21f.; 15. 7-9, I9f.; compare 5. 43-48; 12. 46-50. 

116 This evangelist in several places favors a movement of the 
nations of the earth toward Judaism or Jewish-Christianity. This 


is hardly the type of universalism held by Paul and later Christians. 
13. 38. 18 See 21. 33-43. 


55 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


lyptic day of blessing, but something that can be 
transferred from one to another of competing peo- 
ples. 

In Matt. 3. 2, John Baptist, as suggested above, 
had an immediate, and probably eschatological 
type of Kingdom in mind. But Jesus put a dif- 
ferent content into the same words, quoted by the 
evangelist, as to the nearness of the new order.’” 

There is doubtless a reference to later aspects of 
the Kingdom in 7. 21, ‘‘Not every one who says 
to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom 
of Heaven,” since the context has certain future 
judgments in view. The sequel, “‘but he who does 
the will of my Father in heaven,” shall enter in, 
reminds one of the principle enunciated by Mark,’ 
and repeated by Matthew.®! An ethical relation- 
ship involves “becoming a son of the Father,” 
the evangelist holds, and he is so certain that only 
he who endures “to the end” shall find full self- 
realization that he presents this saying of . the 
Master twice.!** 

In the parables of chapter 13 are found such 
statements as 13. 41-43, the foregoing context of 
which'** has been cited. The words: “The Son of 
man shall send forth his angels and they shall 
gather up out of his Kingdom all the stumbling 
blocks and those who work iniquity,” imply that 
during a process of development there have arisen 
within the Kingdom unworthy men. The picture 


“9 There is manuscript authority for a different reading here: 
“Nigh is the Kingdom of Heaven,” omitting “Repent ... for’ 
(Matt. 4. 17). 


180 Mark 3. 34f., see p. 72 above. ist Matt. 12. b ABSSP- 
18 Matt. 5. 45. 18 10. 22b; 24. 13. 
184 13. 38. 


156 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


is that of a future aspect of the development of the 
new order, perhaps so extreme a point in its: devel- 
opment that the unworthy must be ‘“‘gathered out” 
in the interest of the Kingdom itself. The language 
here and in other parts of the first Gospel is trace- 
able to other Jewish writings somewhat contem- 
porary with the early church, which, as the earlier 
of Paul’s letters testify, thought of an impending 
catastrophic end of the present order. This expec- 
tation was not fulfilled. Later New Testament 
works put less emphasis upon this note. 

Of the remaining important examples of the use 
of apocalyptic language in the First Evangelist’s 
portrayal of the Kingdom should be noted 16. 28, 
which is a vivid statement on the lips of Jesus that 
his hearers’ generation should not all pass away 
before the coming of the Son of man “in his King- 
dom”’; 20. 21, the request of the mother of Zebe- 
dee’s sons that they might occupy places of dis- 
tinction in the Kingdom, evidently having a future 
kingdom of glory and power in mind; 25. 1ff., which 
picturesquely figures the sudden coming of the Son 
of man as a bridegroom, for whom await ten maidens. 
The coming is at length so sudden that the unpre- 
pared are shut out of the festivities. 25. 31 con- 
tinues the discourse upon the coming of the Son of 
man, this time prepared to judge, that is, separate 
the unworthy, the unprepared, those who have not 
in the past offered their fellows such sympathetic 
service as they should from those who had served, 
who were worthy, prepared. 

Finally there is the statement upon Jesus’ lips:’*° 

“Tt declare to you that from now on I shall 

18 26, 29. 


157 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


not drink of this fruit of the vine until that 
day when I drink it new with you in the King- 
dom of my Father.” | 

This statement reflects the view that a day of 
rejoicing, as well as a day of judgment is coming. 
This picture is that of the triumphant, matured, 
completed community of sons of the Father. The 
Kingdom here meant is the same that is proclaimed 
by Jesus as he addresses his hearers, but at a future 
Stage. 

The evidence adduced from the first Gospel shows 
that in the evangelist’s view the Kingdom was one, 
beginning like a very minute and apparently weak 
plant, but proceeding onward to full maturity. 
It must be, in its earlier and middle stages, a part 
of human life, modifying human life as leaven 
modifies and transforms the mass. During its 
human history many unworthy and unkingdom- 
like men will be drawn into its fellowship or will 
seek its shelter. An altered behavior alone will not 
constitute a son of the Father, whose the Kingdom 
is, and one who resists the inner transformation will 
be his own judge, for he cannot abide in the future 
day of triumph and maturity for this movement of 
inner purity and power. 

The life that men live is the field of the real 
Kingdom. Men who become “‘sons of the Father” 
will still pursue their daily vocations, will mingle 
with their friends in social converse, will enter 
into contracts, will engage in financial operations. 
But the spirit and motive with which they do all 
these things will correspond to the life within, which 
is the developing nature of their Father. Sym- 
pathetic service will be spontaneous, philanthropy 


158 


ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 


and prayer will evidence their real relation to God 
and to men, but will not of themselves constitute 
that relation. The ‘Kingdom of Heaven,’ para- 
doxically enough, is a rational, practical, construct- 
ive moral program engaged in by men who do the 


known will of their Father in heaven. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


La! 


. Show that Matthew is not self-contradictory in his | 
statements about the Kingdom of Heaven. 

2. Paraphrase Matt. 25. 31-46 to show its social meaning. 

. Make a list of the parables of the Kingdom found only 
in Matthew. Does this group of parables contain 
any unique teaching as to the Kingdom? 

4. From what Jewish works do the statements about the 

appearance of the Son of man at a future time seem 

to be drawn? 


wW 


159 


CHAPTER IV 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL 
ACCORDING TO LUKE 


PROPORTION OF DISCOURSE OF JESUS IN LUKE; 
THis EVANGELIST’S UNIQUE CONTRIBUTION 
or ETHICAL TEACHING 


THE third Gospel is longer than the first, con- 
taining about 21,000 (Greek) words. Altogether 
there are 9,239 words placed by Luke upon Jesus’ 
lips and 5,298 of these words occur within the so- 
called ‘‘long insertion” of 9. 51-18. 14. Within 
these nine chapters are found a large number of 
parables, many of which are without parallel. 

Compared with Mark and Matthew, Luke stands 
highest in narrative material, and is second only 
to Matthew in discourse. Chapter 12 is richest 
in Jesus’ teaching, containing some 968 words. 
All chapters excepting 1 and 3 have some of his 
words, chapter 2 having fifteen. 

The Third Evangelist offers much teaching that 
has no parallel in the other synoptics, a fact ex- 
plained, no doubt, by the theory that Luke had 
access to sources not open to the other Gospel 
writers. The narrative of this Gospel follows 
quite closely the order of Mark, yet in his Gospel 
as a whole Luke has often struck out upon paths of 
his own and he has withal breathed a spirit into 
his work which differentiates the third Gospel from 
all the others. 


160 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


THE parables of Luke are often noted for their 
large number and their intense human interest. 
Among those peculiar to the third Gospel there are 
some so familiar that many of their phrases have 
become proverbial. Interest in social problems, 
in class distinctions, in the proper use of property, 
in the nature of prayer to God, in the duty and the 
rights of the humble as well as of the high, is well 
sustained by Luke in these short stories of Jesus. 

A strange parable, that of 16. 1-13, wherein 
Jesus’ hearers are urged to “‘make friends out of the 
unrighteous mammon,”’ yet the tale in no wise 
contradicts the teaching of the story of the Rich 
Farmer who confused the scale of values.’ Luke 
understood Jesus to teach that wealth as such has 
its uses. 

But material goods are not worthy of chief 
emphasis, as another parable,? selected from his 
own sources, points out. In this story, a man who 
had all that heart could wish in this life is shown, 
by the lifting of the curtain drawn over the future, 
to be in desperate want. His goods were not en- 
during. But a good man, though poor, who had 
begged in vain at the rich man’s door, appears in 
contrast to his one time social superior to be enjoy- 
ing “‘Abraham’s bosom.” The rich man is scored, 
not for his wealth as such, for Abraham himself was 
one of the richest men in the Old Testament, but 
rather for his failure to “‘make a friend” rather 
than an enemy out of the wealth entrusted to him. 

The so-called “parable of the pounds’” stresses 
the point that good use is to be made of any goods 
entrusted to one. 

112. 16-21. 216. 19-31. 319. 11-27. 

161 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Any catalog of the Lukan material that concerns 
the conservation of wealth must include the para- 
bles of the One Lost Sheep,* the Small Coin that 
Was Lost,> and the Unproductive Tree which was 
worth much patient toil even in the hope that its 
value would repay.’ The whole story involved in 
the last reference appears to contrast with the 
patient gardener the spirit of summary judgment, 
as found in the words of the ardent Baptist: 
“Every tree that does not produce good fruit shall 
be felled and burned.” 

Doubtless the most remarkable parables in Luke 
deal with personal relations within the community. 
The Merciful Samaritan’ indicts forever the com- 
placent selfishness of the socially and ecclesiasti- 
cally exalted. 

Many of the conventional relations in which men 
of his time found themselves are used by Jesus in 
these parables of Luke to teach the ideal relations 
between men and between men and the Father in 
the new ethical community. A Persistent Seeker 
and his Selfish Neighbor at Night® offer a contrast 
to the Father who is ready to grant good things to 
sincere seekers.2 The evangelist selects another 
parable to enforce this teaching in 18. 1-8. The 
judge who vindicated a persistent client only to be’ 
rid of him is in sharp contrast to the Father who 
will ‘‘avenge his elect speedily.” 

Immediately follows’? a unique story of two men 
who offered prayer to God in quite different atti- 

#15. I-7. 15. 8-10. 

®Luke 13. et See below, Luke and the Synoptics in their 
Attitude Toward Property for further consideration of this data. 

710. 29-37. S31. 5-8. 

911. 9-13. 1078. 9-14. 

162 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


tudes. The spirit within a.-man counts more than 
his social position. Luke leaves no doubt that this 
story was directed at “certain people who were 
persuaded in themselves that they were about 
right and who counted all others out.” 

Besides the foregoing parables there are eight or 
nine instances of more or less formal address by 
Jesus in the third Gospel which offer distinct ethical 
contributions. Some of these find exposition in 
later sections. 

Some of these addresses bear the form of parables, 
as the story of the Two Debtors, which formed the 
ground of a reproof to a Pharisee, Simon by name, 
who had treated Jesus none too courteously yet 
criticized all too gratuitously his gracious treat- 
ment of an ostracized woman.’ Another much- 
needed lesson in etiquette was applied to both 
guests and host, when” the Master noted the self- 
seeking that characterized the social behavior of his 
contemporaries. 

Luke describes in his own terms the repudiation 
of Jesus as a social prophet by his townspeople™ 
and in two other passages” describes two types of 
servant and their appropriate reward, perhaps with 
the high example of Jesus himself in mind. 

The address to the Seventy, whom Jesus sent 
out “into every city and place to which he himself 
intended to come’’” may be supplemented by re- 
calling Jesus’ own call to repentance,” his proposal 
of strict conditions of discipleship” and possibly his 
declaration to the Pharisees of 17. 20-21: 





117, 40-50. 214. rae ol 44. 16-30. 
472, 42-48; 17... 7-10. 10. 1-16. 
16 13, 1-9. W 14. 28-35. 


163 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


“The Kingdom of God does not come after 
the fashion of sense perception, nor shall people 
say, Look here, or there! For in fact the King- 
dom of God is within you.” 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


t. Compare the words of Jesus in the Nazareth syna- 
gogue with the passage in Isaiah 61. 1 and note 
(a) the accuracy of the quotation, and (6) whether 
the prophet had somewhat the same meaning in 
his words as here represented by Luke. 
. What distinction is made between the ‘“‘disciples’’ and 
“‘apostles”’ of Luke 6. 13? Do you understand that 
at this time many people were seriously attempting 
to follow Jesus? If so, for what reason? 
3. Do you identify Levi of Luke 5. 29 with Matt. of 6. 15? 
If so, upon what evidence? 

4. Upon precisely what grounds do you suppose the 
fellow townsmen of Jesus sought to assault him? 
(4. 28-209.) 

5. Find any passages in Mark which are parallel to Luke 
4. 41. Describe in your own words what really 
happened. 


t& 


THE SERMON ON THE Pratn: Jesus’ Law oF 
SOcIAL AmiITy, ACCORDING TO LUKE 


The first discourse in Luke is found in chapter 6. 
Following the gospel of the infancy and youth of 
Jesus,® appear John Baptist’s call to repentance,” 
the baptism of .Jesus,”? his ‘genealogy,’ his retire- 
ment,” in which Satan “completed every temp- 
tation,”’ after which the public teaching of the Lord 
is begun.”* 

18 Luke, chapters 1 and 2. 19 32. 2-20. 

203. aif. 313, 23-38. 24. I-13. 4. 14ff. 

164 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


His own townspeople reject their prophet,”* but 
others” are astonished at his authoritative manner 
of teaching, and his fame spreads widely. 

Although Jesus begins his public ministry in the 
synagogue,”° it appears that the multitude of hearers 
soon compel him to teach out a doors,’ or in any 
house where he happens to be.” 

Healings accompany the teaching in the syna- 
gogue and by the seaside,”® and at the point where 
Luke places this discourse Jesus has excited the 
hostile interest of Pharisees and doctors from 
Jerusalem® as well as that-of his fellow townsmen. 

In the Sermon on the Plain the Third Evangelist 
details the instruction of his disciples when Jesus 
separates from their number twelve ‘‘apostles.”’ 
It is clear that the company was by no means 
small*! and that much interest in the curing power 
of the Teacher was continually adding to the number 
of followers. 

The presence of a large number of needy people, 
socially submerged, poor, hungry, in tears, hated 
of their fellows,®* seems to turn the Teacher’s mind 
toward the problem of the social order, split up into 
layers distinct from one another, with the lines of 
cleavage probably becoming more rather than less 
distinct. 

It forms an opportune occasion for a pronounce- 
ment upon the cure of a distressing situation and 
upon the constructive program in which these 
“disciples” must engage in order to bring about 
their social, ener and spiritual redemption. 


"fe 28ff. 32, 37- 84. 44. 
15. 16ff. 38 2 foe example, 5. 29. 

294. 33ff., 38f., aah 5. 12ff., 18ff.; 6. 6ff., 19. 

0 5. 17ff. Bult. 326, 20-22. 


165 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


The address may be paraphrased thus: 


My disciples, many of you find that life brings 
you poverty with its accompanying hunger and 
distress, moreover, much sorrow fills your days 
and men look down upon you. Yet all this 
does not disqualify you for the finer joys that 
come to men engaged in high moral endeavor. 
History records that men of the past who are 
believed to be among the most favored of God 
had a similar lot. On the other hand, you 
rich, you joyful, you satisfied and you who are 
applauded, are not by these tokens alone to be 
congratulated. For these may presage loss and 
disaster. 


I have this word to say, with emphasis: 
Abandon the superficial rule of the day, and 
serve even those who are against you, cultivate 
a brotherly attitude toward even your adver- 

_ saries, do good instead of evil in every respect, 
taking as the measure of your conduct the rule, 
“‘As you would that men should do to you, do 
likewise unto them.”’ 


While such a policy may to some appear 
futile, I assure you it is the very way in which 
the Father deals with his creatures. All men 
are not thankful to him, yet he brings the 
common blessings upon the ungodly as upon 
the good. In loving even your enemies you 
establish your own sonship with the Father. 

Set a positive example that seems to you 
good, without waiting to see what your ad- 
vantages will be. Do not be censorious, mean, 
niggardly. For it is a common rule that like 


166 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


begets like in this world. And your example 
may make others generous and brotherly. 

This law of social amity Jesus enforced with 
many illustrations. It takes a man who has eyes 
to guide the blind. It needs a teacher who knows 
his subject to instruct his pupil. One ought not 
try to take a speck from his neighbor’s eye until 
one’s own eye is clear. Thus it is in nature, a good 
tree is needed to produce perfect fruit, and the 
appropriate fruit comes only from the tree fitted 
by nature to bear it. Men identify the tree by its 
fruit. It takes a good man to do good deeds. 
The proverb has it, ‘‘Out of the fullness of the heart 
one’s mouth speaks.” 

“My disciples,” said the Teacher in effect, ‘“‘are 
called upon to lead and not to follow. They are 
the chosen men of insight, who shall show men 
that they are indeed sons of the Most High, and as 
such, shall show the community that the Father’s 
way of doing things is productive of the greatest 
good.” 

“T shall be most disappointed with that man who 
hears me, who sees clearly what I mean and yet 
does not follow my teaching. He is like a senseless 
builder who trusts a costly edifice to an insecure 
foundation.’ 

It is clear to the reader that Luke understands 
these words of Jesus as formal instruction addressed 
to his disciples. The subject is “‘The Kingdom of 
God,” as verse 29 indicates. ‘‘You poor, you are 
to be congratulated, for the Kingdom of God is 
yours.” 


3 Luke 6. 20-38. % Luke 6. 39-49. 
167 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


The words of John Baptist® bring to remembrance 
the vivid portrayal of God’s coming, as the great 
prophet of the Return had foretold,** and Jesus’ 
opening address in the synagogue at Nazareth*’ 
was accompanied by an appeal to ancient words,® 
which the speaker declared were fulfilled in himself. 
These passages from Jewish Scriptures promise a 
better moral and social order in which the people 
of God will live. Such a golden day to come was 
the substance of many a prophet’s vision. Jesus’ 
message, as Luke understands it, carried the con- 
viction to his intimate hearers that the new order 
was imminent. This new order was the Reign of 
God. | 

Even more pointedly than Matthew, Luke iden- 
tifies the classes who shall be eligible for member- 
ship in the new order. Not the most prominent, 
but the most needy are those to whom the call 
comes. 

While the meaning of this term, “Kingdom of 
God,” for the Third Evangelist must await more 
thorough examination of his Gospel, it is clear thus 
far that it concerns a program for betterment of 
human living conditions and that it is a program 
that involves the activity of chosen men in the 
moral sphere. All the conditions set forth in the 
Sermon on the Plain are conditions of human life. 

This Sermon is much shorter than the Sermon on 
the Mount. While much material is parallel, its 
arrangement in each case is individually determined. 
Luke will offer more parables as vehicles of Jesus’ 
teaching of the Kingdom. Thus he does not need to 

% Luke 3. 4ff. 3% Tsa. 40. 3ff. 

37 Luke 4. 16ff. 8 Isa. 61. iff. 

168 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


carry his formal Sermon to such a length as did the 
First Evangelist. | 

The outstanding teaching of the pericope is that 
men, Jesus’ disciples, are to become conspicuous 
leaders in a program that involves unselfish and 
often unrewarded service of others; that this is the 
Master’s and the Father’s attitude toward ll, 
hence the disciple will imitate the highest example 
offered to men. Such an example of disinterested 
service will at length become infectious, and to the 
extent to which this becomes true, a high degree 
of social amity will result. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLAss REPORTS 


1. What classes in Jewish society appear in the first six 
chapters of Luke? 

2. Compare the number of topics treated in Luke’s 
Sermon with the number of topics in Matthew’s 
Sermon. 

3. What is the theme of Luke 6. 20-49? 

4. What emphasis upon ‘‘reward”’ do you find in Luke’s 
Sermon? 

5. How is the selection of the Twelve placed respectively 
by Matthew and Luke? 

6. What different effect, if any, does Luke obtain from 
the placing of his words about fasting (5. 33ff.) 
and the Sabbath (6. 1ff.) as compared with Mat- 
thew’s teaching on these points? 


ETHICS AND CONVENTIONALITY: JESUS’ TREAT- 
MENT OF THE SOCIALLY UNFIT 
Among the Jewish people class distinctions were 
strictly drawn. The Pharisee dwelt upon the 
difference between himself and “‘other men,” espe- 
cially the publican who for the moment came within 
169 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


his vision,®? social outcasts did favors for those 
within their own circle,*° the priest and the Levite 
hesitated to touch a common man even to aid him 
in distress,*! guests at a feast were inclined to choose 
for themselves places of honor, although the arrival 
of one in a more favored class might bring humil-— 
iation,” the rich were particularly apt to be self- 
centered,*“* and in general, conditions as Jesus 
observed them led him to urge tolerance and catho- 
licity, even affection and interest in and for men of 
all classes.* 

In Palestine there appeared to be in many minds 
an implicit assumption that God himself had estab- 
lished the different classes among men to corres- 
pond with his love and care for them. The third 
Gospel notably devotes attention to the various 
classes to whom Jesus rendered service, thus offering 
ground for supposing that the Teacher considered 
such an assumption unethical. 

In the synoptics generally the deliberate breaking 
of social barriers by Jesus* was in the eyes of the 
religious leaders an offensive action, but Luke under- 
stands that Jesus’ persistence in this practice was an 
object lesson to reinforce his teaching that real 
values in men are not determined by outward 
marks, such as wealth, social position, or office. 
The Third Evangelist presents in a large number of 
passages*® his attitude toward the Jewish social 
observances as modified or criticized by Jesus. 

39 Luke 18. 9-14. 96. 34f. ‘10. 29-37. 14. 7-14. 

“14. 13-21; 16. 14, 19-31. 4413. I-9; 9. 51-56; 7. 36-50. 

4 For example, Matt. 9. 1off.; Mark 2. 15sff.; 7. 26. 

4 Characteristic portions are Luke 6. 34f.; 7. 36-50; 9. 51-56; 
10. 29-37; 12. 13-21} 13. I-5; 14. 7-14; 16. 14f., 19-31; 18. 9-14; 


19. I-10. There is no doubt that the conventional social life of 
the Jewish people is correctly reflected in these passages. 


170 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


Says Jesus, in substance, a man has, in his own 
right, distinct possibilities of moral development. 
Any convention or institution that tends to hinder 
a man’s moral development, when measured beside 
the man, must yield. When it amounts to public 
neglect of men, the convention that thus dictates 
is itself immoral.” 

There is perhaps nothing more human than to 
reverence an ancient institution, particularly if it 
possesses a religious sanction. The Sabbath among 
the Jewish people was such an institution. Jesus 
found men surrounding the Sabbath with restrictions 
that seemed to him irrational. The disciples were 
challenged for rubbing grains of wheat in their 
hands on that day,** but Jesus returned: answer 
that King David had the insight even to eat bread 
that was hallowed, thus setting human need above 
ceremonial ritual. Again the Master made reply 
to his critics’? that a poor woman, a daughter of 
Abraham, was rightfully restored to health on the 
Sabbath.® 

Conventions, in any society, tend to become 
tyrannical. Frequently they lag behind moral dis- 
covery and fail to keep pace with developing social 
needs. When this is the case, says Jesus, let the 
conventional give place to that which best serves 
the highest personal values, such as inner purity, 
manliness, love for fellow men, honor, character 
itself. 

Distinctions between classes were found by the 

7 See particularly Luke 13. ali and 14. I-6. 

4 Luke 6. 2. Luke 13. 16 

50 Compare Luke 11. 3Ib, 32 in the light of Professor Bacon’s 


note on the translation of “greater than,” Journal of Religion, 
vol. iv, p. 259f., 1924. 


171 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


evangelist to be barriers between him who would 
serve and those who most needed services. Very 
instructive is the story in Luke 7. 36-50, in which 
figured a Pharisee as host, Jesus as guest, and a 
woman from an ostracized class, who came in to 
anoint the Master with tears and perfume. In 
other Gospels complaint is made in similar cases 
as to the waste of the perfume. Here it is strictly 
a social contact that is questioned. ‘The Pharisee 
argues that Jesus did not divine her character, else 
he would not have allowed her to touch him.*! 
But the sequel shows that Jesus clearly knew her 
character and her need. Furthermore, he satisfied 
that need. Then he related a story to his host, 
Simon, carrying the plain yet effective lesson that 
this person, despised by the Pharisee class, was 
actually in a situation to love him more than those 
who felt less need. 

With Jesus, social service was far more than a 
word. The desire to serve led him to encounter the 
strongest social taboos and to break them when 
the alleviation of need was possible. 

Luke furnishes his reader with a fairly detailed 
account of the field of service as Jesus understood 
it; or, in modern terms, it may be said that Luke 
defined the ethics of social service by the use of a 
variety of examples of Jesus’ teaching and practice. 

The Reign of God as a moral program had its 
field in the social life of the people of his day, Luke 
seems to say. The Master feasted alike with Phari- 
sees and publicans, with those who believed them- 
selves models of “righteousness”? and with those 
who knew themselves to be sinners and despised. 

"7. 39. 

172 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


In fact, to these latter Jesus promised the greater 
felicity." The sick needed the physician, one’s 
neighbor is that one who is in need, whatever his 
status. Social service would tend to obliterate 
artificial barriers that hindered its beneficent spread. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLAss REPORTS 


1. After a study of Like 4. 18ff.; 5. 12ff.; 5. 27-29; 7. 22; 
11. 38ff. and similar passages, indicate the character 
of the class barriers in Jesus’ way. Give references 
for any additional portions studied. 

2. In what ways does Luke teach that formalism may 
become a substitute for moral practice? 

3. Define conventionality and discuss the competition 
between conventionality and ethics in terms of 
present-day life. Which of the two should have 
the greater authority? Which probably has the 
greater force in your community? 

4. Identify any conventional practices that now pre- 
vail, yet which are not abreast of recognized social 
need. 

5s. In what way can you defend the thesis that morality 
is the same for all classes of people? To what 
degree can the existence of class distinctions be 
justified ? 

6. What passages in Luke may be said to deal with 
etiquette? To what extent does etiquette lie in the 
field of ethics? 


THE ETHICS OF PROPAGANDA 
Luke makes it plain to his reader that Jesus 
desired to spread his teaching at least among his 
fellow countrymen, for this evangelist has an account 
of the sending of the Twelve upon a mission,°® and 
in addition narrates“ that the Lord ‘appointed 


& 6, 22. 88 Chapter 9. 5 Chapter I0. 
173 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


seventy others,” with a view to sending them ahead 
of him. Presumably all this activity was confined 
to Jewish people and Jewish territory.” 

Luke agrees with the other synoptic Gospel writers 
that Jesus made effort to propagate his message 
widely during his lifetime, and that he made pro- 
vision for the spread of the “‘good news”’ after his 
demise. Even in the first Gospel occur words 
that are sometimes interpreted to sanction an 
unrestricted appeal to all nations to become Jesus’ 
disciples, without reference to Judaism, although 
the sequel, as far as the book of Acts records, favors 
the view that the disciples at first put a more re- 
stricted interpretation upon the Great Commis- 
sion of Matt. 28.19, ‘Luke’ 24. 47; and Acts''1. 8. 

Certain it is that the religious teachers of Judaism 
made strenuous efforts to propagate their views 
and win proselytes, as Jesus himself declares,*” 
although without approval of the views thus pro- 
pagated. Paul of Tarsus, a Pharisee of the second 
or third generation, well illustrates the missionary 
zeal of those who held the Jewish Torah to contain 
the supreme revelation of God to men. 

All the synoptic evangelists agree that Jesus 
sought to spread the “good news’ of the imminent 
Reign of God most widely. Mark says that Jesus 
appointed the Twelve “that he might send them 
forth to herald the good news’’; Matthew says he 
sent the Twelve ‘“‘to the lost sheep of the house of 
Israel” while upon their Galilean mission, but after 
Jesus’ resurrection™ “all the nations’ are included 


5 Luke 9. 6, “through the villages,”; 10. 1, ‘every place into 
which he himself was about to come.” 

56 Matt. 28. 19. 57 Matt. 23. 15. 

83. 14. 59 To. 6. 69 Matt. 28. 19. 


174 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


in their mission. Luke imposes no territorial re- 
strictions upon the apostles of the Galilean period, 
and after the resurrection thinks of Jesus as sending 
his followers to ‘“‘all the nations,’ although the 
beginning should be at Jerusalem. The Third 
Evangelist, indeed, seems to hold that all this 
propaganda had scriptural sanction, for in 24. 44ff. 
he represents the Master as saying: 

“These are my words which I spoke to you 
while I was still with you, namely, that all 
things which are written in the law of Moses 
and in the prophets and in the psalms concern- 
ing me must be fulfilled. Then he opened 
their mind to the understanding of the Scrip- 
tures, and he said to them: Thus it is written 
é that repentance and remission of sin 
should be preached in his name unto all the 
nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”’ 

Thus while all the synoptics agree in the view that 
Jesus was interested in spreading the “good news,” 
Luke, with his mission of the Seventy, his appeal 
to scriptural sanction for the continued propa- 
ganda after the death of the Master and his many 
expressions indicating the conviction of Jesus that 
he was directed by the Father to proclaim widely 
his message of the coming new order of things,** 
a task and responsibility which he shared with his 
disciples, emphasizes more than the others the 
interest of Jesus in reaching the many with his 
message. 

The book of Acts, written by the Third Evangel- 
ist, contains abundant evidence that the disciples 

MA TAO 0tA A355. 39h Fe Batst erik OA. 2) 10s 25 001 ATaee ae 
37f.; 22. 35-38. 

175 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


carried out a vigorous program of preaching and. 
making converts to “‘the Way,” as Jesus’ program 
was called in those days. Whether Luke wrote into 
his Gospel the impression of serious campaigning 
for Jesus’ ideal which he saw during his companion- 
ship with Paul may remain an open question. It 
is certain, at all events, that this evangelist heartily 
endorsed such a program and that he believed it to 
be entirely within the plan of the Master. 

The reader of the third Gospel cannot fail to note 
that Jesus and his disciples set out with the intention 
of bringing men into their following, in response 
to no express invitation on the part of those sought 
but, rather, in response to the mute appeal which 
their need offered. Jesus likened the people of 
Galilee to “sheep unshepherded” and again to a 
harvest field wasted for lack of harvesters. 

The ethical significance of this is obvious. 
Whether Jesus himself made missionary journeys 
outside of Israel or not, his words were pregnant 
with missionary meaning. It may even be admitted 
that Jesus did not expressly teach his disciples that 
“all nations’ should be directly invited to share 
their fellowship, in fact, such an admission may be 
demanded by the very limitations under which the 
work of Jesus was carried on. But it cannot be 
doubted that soon after the death of Jesus the 
Reign of God appeared to the understanding of 
his most advanced disciples as a program that 
involved all men. The monotheism of Judaism 
logically demanded a Fatherhood of God, the only 
living God, which in turn demanded a brotherhood 
of men. The Reign of God could be complete 

® Luke 10. 2. 

176 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


only when all men were included under its sway. 
Thus Jesus’ teaching, as it ripened in the thought 
of the disciples, called for the inclusion of all nations 
within its meaning, as the distinct teaching of the 
Kingdom had clearly demanded the inclusion of 
all moral aspects of human living under its sway. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. Compare the reported words of Jesus in Luke 24. 
45-49 with those in Acts 1. 8 and in Matt. 28. 19a. 
Which passage most implicitly directs the disciples 
to present Jesus’ program without respect to the 
demands of Judaism? Does either passage seem 
more original than others? 

2. Find in the book of Acts the place which describes 
the first instance of direct evangelizing of Greek 
people. What is the date of this attempt? 

3. Of the two Gospels, Matthew and Luke, which offers 
the greater evidence of the universal character of 
Jesus’ mission? Present the evidence in compact 
form. 

4. In what way can you justify the uninvited propagation 
of such a program as that of Jesus’ Reign of God? 

5. Can it be shown that the present-day “‘social gospel”’ 
is justified in its demand that all business relations 
be submitted to the law of the Kingdom as Jesus 
taught it? 


THE ETHICS OF MATERIAL POSSESSIONS: 
LUKE AND THE OTHER SYNOPTIC WRITERS 


The synoptic Gospels generally assume that men 
who have submitted themselves to the Reign of 
God shall still engage in business, own property, 
and doubtless collect rental, permit interest to accrue 
and maintain their property in good condition. 
While one man is called upon to renounce all his 


177 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


wealth,® another™ may be received with no demand 
that he part with his goods. It is said of one of 
the Twelve, Levi, doubtless with approval, that 
he “forsook everything” to follow Jesus. In the 
context Levi spends a noticeable amount of money 
to “‘make a great feast in his house” in honor of 
Jesus. Luke supports the view that men within 
the Kingdom were still to own property, just as 
Mark and Matthew hold that the field of the King- 
dom is the world of persons in their economic, 
industrial, and domestic surroundings. For Jesus 
addressed those who manifestly are within the 
Reign of God, saying, “Lend, never despairing’ and 
“give.” Thus the evangelist assumes that these 
disciples are to own something which they can lend 
or give. ‘True, the measure of property owned may 
not be large, in the thought of the evangelist, for he 
reminds his readers that upon sending his seventy 
missioners forth Jesus said to them: 

“Do not carry a purse, or an alms-bag 
[wallet], or shoes; and do not salute anyone 
along the way. Remain in the same house, 
eating and drinking what they have. For 
worthy the laborer of his pay. Do not move 
from house to house.’ 

As in the second and first Gospels, the disciple 
is warned against making property as such the chief 
object of interest. His followers are to ‘“‘seek the 
Kingdom’ which, indeed, the Father will make 
readily available,’’ and with it all needed material 
things. “Your Father knows that you have need 


$3 Luke 18. 22. “4 19..9. 6 Luke 5. 28. 
6s Aes Luke 4. 18; 10.9; 17.21 etal, % Luke 6. 35. 
6. 38. 69 Luke 10. 4-7. 7 Luke 12.,31. ™ 32. 32, 


178 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


of these things.’’* The moral lies close at hand,” 


that the chief interests of a man will be directed 
intensely in the direction of his most highly prized 
possessions. So it may be necessary or advisable 
to sell what one has and use the proceeds in giving 
alms, for the purse that does not grow old and the 
values which may neither be defaced or stolen are, 
after all, most appropriate for the disciple.’* Yet 
normally Jesus seems, in the estimation of the 
Third Evangelist, to teach that property should 
rightly remain in the control of the men of the 
Kingdom, and that such property should be made 
productive. 

For in the short stories or parables so often used 
in his teaching in the third Gospel Jesus more than 
implies the desirability of seeing property produc- 
tive rather than idle. The man who owned a 
fig tree that did not bear” would summarily replace 
it, but his gardener sought time and opportunity 
to make it fruitful. The man who had a hundred 
sheep went after the one that had strayed, illus- 
trating primarily’® the one repentant sinner, con- 
trasted with the many who need not to repent, 
nevertheless citing the action of the shepherd as 
natural and commendable. Otherwise the parable 
would fail of its purpose. The rich man of Luke 
16. roff. merits condemnation not so much for being 
rich as for his personal attitude toward the needy 
brother at his gate. For in the sequel is found a 
rich man on each side of the abyss, Dives and 
Abraham. 

Upon any fair interpretation of the parable of 


72712. 30. Luo & Dake #, B 4 Luke 12. 33.: 
% 13. Off. 15, 7. 


179 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the Wasteful Steward” the evangelist represents 
Jesus as commending a proper care for property, 
whether one’s own or another’s, and even as ad- 
vising a diplomatic use of wealth. But this atti- 
tude of Jesus is also clearly defended on the part of 
Luke only as it is modified by the caution that such 
property holds a subordinate place in the life of a 
man of the Kingdom. The ultimate teaching of 
Luke here should be compared with that of Mat- 
thew in the Sermon on the Mount: “You cannot 
serve God and mammon.”’ 

Jesus himself did not lead an abstemious life. 
Charges were brought against him,” at least con- 
cerning his disciples, involving the generous use of 
food: ‘‘The disciples of John fast often and offer 
supplication, just as the disciples of the Pharisees 
do, but yours are eating and drinking.’ 

Luke does not indicate in any way that the Jewish 
leaders or Jesus condemned the centurion of 7.2—-10 
for his possession of such wealth that he could be- 
come a benefactor of the Jewish community in 
building them a synagogue. Jesus clearly commends 
the man for an inner quality not found in some 
Jewish people. ‘‘Not even in Israel did I find such 
faith!’®° True, this centurion was not of Jesus’ 
immediate following, but he was a beneficiary of 
the Master and the latter is reported to have com- 
mended a ‘“‘personal value” found in him. The 
reader would, indeed, feel a distinct sense of incon- 
gruity if there had been inserted in this story of the 
centurion any condemnation of wealth. 

During the mission journeys upon which Jesus 

7 Luke 16. 1-8. % 5. 33ff. 

79 See also Luke 7. 33f. 807. ob. 

180 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


sent his disciples they were to dispense with super- 
fluous goods*! and depend upon the bounty of the 
people to whom they preached. But at the close 
of Jesus’ ministry he distinctly told his followers® 
that these conditions were to change and that they 
must go out with equipment. The sequel indicates 
that the disciples interpreted these words conserva- 
tively, for Paul insisted upon working for his own 
living while preaching the Kingdom, and perhaps 
no disciple in the apostolic period acquired much 
of this world’s goods. But it is not apparent that 
any of them understood that Jesus condemned 
property as such. Such a story as that of Ananias 
and Sapphira in Acts 5, however, teaches that the 
apostles had a lively sense of values in the use of 
money or other property. For Ananias was rebuked 
not so much for holding back a part of the price 
as for misrepresenting the transaction. 

Neither did Jesus, according to the Third Evangel- 
ist, condemn the scrupulous tithing of income 
from the garden, a practice carried on by the most 
punctilious sect, the Pharisees. There is nothing 
wrong in such minute estimates of offering to God, 
to be sure, for this tithing is not to be left undone. 
Yet if such practice be substituted for the practice 
of justice and for the genuine love of God, it is 
immoral. In Luke 11. 42-44 the evangelist teaches 
his reader that personal relations, especially those 
involving social-ethical practices, are first in order 
of importance. 

A most important deliverance of Jesus reported 
by Luke® gives with great clearness the evangelist’s 


9, 3ff.; 10. 7. 82 22. 35f. 8 32. 13ff. 
181 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


understanding of the Master’s mind on the property 
question. A listener attempts to win the influence 
of the Teacher in his dispute with other heirs as to 
a certain inheritance. Jesus refuses to become a 
party to his dispute, but interests himself in the 
higher values involved. ‘‘See that you keep your- 
self on guard against all forms of covetousness; 
for it is not upon the abundance of possessions 
that a man’s life is based.”’ The evangelist further 
illustrates the remark by a parable having to do 
with a farmer who considered that a prosperous 
year with its abundant crops assured him of all that 
a hungry soul desired. But the soul appears to be 
dependent upon other than material nourishment. 

The foregoing occasion was used also for admo- 
nition of the disciples themselves.* ‘‘The life is 
more than nourishment and the body itself more 
than its clothing. . . . Do not put too much 
emphasis upon the externals, for the Father will 
surely provide needful things.”” The saying found 
in 12.32 does not seem any too well fitted to its 
context, but adds to the entire passage a note of 
beautiful assurance of the Father’s intention to 
bestow upon the disciples of Jesus the summum 
bonum, the benefits of the new order itself, and not 
merely supply bodily needs. 

This survey of the material in the third Gospel 
that deals with property or material values as such 
results in a few definite conclusions: 

Jesus teaches that the new order concerns itself 
with social conditions. Men who qualify as citi- 
zens of the Kingdom are still citizens of some com- 
munity on earth. , 

% 12. 22ff, 

182 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


Material goods are appropriate possessions of 
citizens of the Kingdom. 

Not the amount of material wealth, but its use, 
counts in its real value to the citizen of the Kingdom; 
for character, and not wealth, constitutes a man’s 
life. 

Moral values inhere in personality, not in wealth 
as such. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. Show whether the development of a Christian order 
is compatible with the continuance of modern indus- 
trial enterprises. Collect evidence from Luke and 
other Synoptics to confirm or deny the judgment 
that to conduct business upon a strictly profit- 
making basis collides with Jesus’ teaching. 

. Illustrate the statement that wealth per se cannot 
have moral value. What truth is found in the 
expression ‘“‘tainted money’’? 

3. To what extent has Christianity actually insisted upon 

poverty as a basis for membership in the Kingdom 
of God? 

4. Show whether business institutions, for example, banks, 
factories, transportation systems, and insurance 
companies, are appropriate in a modern Christian 
moral order. 

. Gather all the evidence to be found in Luke to sup- 
port the statement that personal values (that is, 
nonmaterial values) are supreme. 


NS 


on 


THE ETHICS OF THE FAMILY 


There is every reason to suppose that Jesus 
thought of the family as the unit within the moral 
community which he termed the Reign of God. 
The story of Jesus’ birth, infancy, and youth, pre- 
served by this evangelist in chapters 1 and 2 of his 


183 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Gospel reflects his judgment as to the preeminence 
of the monogamous family in Christian circles. For 
the family in which Jesus was reared appears to be 
exemplary in its inner relations. Not only the evan- 
gelist but writers of some other New Testament 
books use the figure of the family to illustrate the 
most intimate personal relations between men and 
God, as well as between men.® 

In search of Jesus’ views as to the ethics of the 
family, however, as in the case of his teaching 
_ about property, as to formal religious observance 
and other matters, the student will fail to find any 
set discourse or compendium of directions that will 
entirely satisfy his inquiries. Practically all of 
Jesus’ teaching which the evangelists have recorded 
as bearing upon this inquiry is found in the form of 
answers to specific questions asked of the Teacher, 
or in response to some further inquiry made in private 
by his disciples. The Third Evangelist has not 
recorded as much of Jesus’ teaching upon the family 
relations as the First,®® however, and the most im- 
portant passage in Luke®’ is unfortunately without 
a coherent context, hence difficult to articulate 
with the Master’s other teaching upon the theme. 

Since Luke offers no related context to his quo- 
tation from Jesus, ‘‘He who divorces his wife and 
marries another commits adultery, and he who 
marries a divorcee commits adultery,” the saying 
should be studied with reference to words of Jesus 
reported by Mark and Matthew. As noted above® 


% See Mark 3. 31ff.; Luke 12. 32; 15. 11-32; John 14. 8ff.; 
Rom. 8. 14ff.; Eph. 5. 1, and many similar passages. 

8 Pages I4I-I45 above should be reviewed here. 

87 16. 18, 8 Page 14af. 


184 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


the First Evangelist offers a restriction upon the 
absolute negation of divorce, which appears in 
neither of the other synoptics. Thus Mark and 
Luke are likely to be more closely in harmony. 

Mark tro. r1f. reads as follows: 

“Whoever divorces his wife and marries 
another commits adultery against her; and if 
she divorces her husband and marries another 
she commits adultery.’ 

Luke and Mark alike consider the case of divorce 
which involves remarriage in each case making the 
statement that such remarriage constitutes a breach 
of the seventh commandment; Luke further affirms 
the same of the divorcee who remarries; and Mark 
takes up the possible case under Roman law in 
which a wife divorces her husband to remarry, affirm- 
ing that such a case also constitutes adultery. With 
one voice these two evangelists assert the immoral 
nature of divorce which has remarriage as its sequel. 
There is no unambiguous statement to be found in 
these Gospels dealing with separation of husband 
and wife without reference to remarriage. But the 
statements above considered leave no doubt in the 
reader’s mind that in the evangelist’s understanding 
of Jesus’ teaching divorce is unkingdomlike and 
abnormal. In perhaps all cases noted the immor- 
ality involved was entirely antecedent to the divorce 
proceeding itself. 

Divorce, however, is but one aspect of family 


89 The order in verse 11 makes it possible to translate: ‘Whoever 
divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery with the 
latter,’ but the use of the same pronoun (‘ ‘against her,” ‘‘she,’’ 
verse 12) makes it probable that by the expression “against her,” 
as above rendered, Mark was thinking of the first wife of the man 
in question. 


185 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


ethics. There is nothing in the third Gospel to 
contradict the view won by study of the first and 
second Gospels in their view of the Kingdom of 
God, namely, that the life of men and women in 
family relationships is in reality the life of men and 
women who are subject to the Reign of God even 
while living under wholly human conditions. What- 
ever is true of the larger moral community is true of 
the family relationships. Nothing in the gospels 
points to Jesus’ approval of a harsh attitude toward 
the offender. The Master freely forgave the sins 
of the paralytic let down by his friends through the 
roof, and to the “woman who was a sinner’! 
he said: ‘“‘Your sins are forgiven.’’ No reader can 
doubt that the “pericope adulterae,’”? which is clearly 
synoptic in style, and perhaps Lukan, teaches that 
Jesus forgave the social offender in the words, ‘‘Go 
your way, from now on, sin no more.” 

Yet Jesus makes even family relationships subor- 
dinate to Kingdom loyalty. Those very strong 
words in Luke 14. 25f. bear witness to the SUpTEste 
claim of the latter: 

“If any one comes to me and does not hate 
his own father and mother and wife and children 
and brothers and sisters, yes, even his own life, 
he cannot be my disciple.” 

These words are doubtless to be interpreted in 
the light of other words to be found in the same 
Gospel, as for example, 18. 29: 

“TI solemnly assure you that there is no one 
who has forsaken home or wife or brothers or 
parents or children for the sake of the Reign of 


9° Luke 5. 20ff. 1 Luke 7. 48. % John 7. 53-8. II. 
186 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


God who shall not receive many fold in the 
present and in the future eternal life.” 

When someone enthusiastically pronounced bless- 
ings upon Jesus’ own mother for bearing and rearing 
him, he returned answer:? “Nay, rather blessed 
are those who hear and perform the word of God!”’ 

The Master in no wise depreciates the sanctity 
of marriage nor belittles the importance of loyal 
relations within the family. Such loyalties are 
entirely harmonious with Kingdom loyalty and may 
coexist. But when the Gospels were written there 
had occurred many separations from those who 
would not go with the disciple upon the way of his 
Lord. Many a man and woman had actually for- 
saken parents and had broken conjugal relations 
for the sake of the Reign of God. The strong 
words of Luke in his report of Jesus’ challenge to 
‘his disciples may well be both prophecy and history. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


. Investigate Jesus’ attitude toward women and chil- 

dren as represented by Luke. 

2. What details of Jesus’ own family relationships can 
you reconstruct? 

3. Study Luke 16. 18; Mark ro. 11f.; Matt. 19. 9; 5. 32 
with reference to the question whether the remarriage 
element alone made the divorce immoral in Jesus’ 
thought. 

4. Show what effect upon frequency of divorce the prac- 
tical application of the principle of reconciliation 
would have. Consult the section upon Ethics of 
the Family in the first Gospel, above, and particu- 
larly Matt. 5. 23ff. and 18. rsff. 

5. Do Jesus’ words in Matt. 19. 8 indicate that the moral 


% Luke I1. 28. 


ei 


187 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


status of divorce varies with the times? What do 
the words teach as to evolution in moral thought? 

6. Where in the New Testament, outside the Gospels, 
do you find any reference to the division of fam- 
ilies for the sake of the Kingdom of God? 


THE VIEW OF THE THIRD EVANGELIST CON- 
CERNING THE REIGN OF GOD 


In this Gospel, as in the other Synoptics, the 
student looks in vain for a concise exposition of the 
Reign of God which can be ascribed to Jesus as a 
formal, definitive statement. On the other hand, 
one finds many statements and similes that have for 
their aim the explanation of this new ethical com- 
munity. Mark puts much stress upon ethical 
relations between the members of the community, 
Matthew emphasizes two sides or aspects of the new 
order, namely, the present and developing stage, then 
the perfected or eschatological era of its history. 
Luke, it is true, points out some words of Jesus 
that have the apocalyptic tone, but on the whole 
he thinks of the Kingdom as an ethical program 
that concerns itself with relations within the social 
order, with removal of conventional barriers between 
needy persons and their brothers, with the right 
use of this world’s goods and with effective com- 
munion between men and God. 

With Mark and Matthew, Luke has his version 
of the synoptic apocalypse, but neither of the suc- 
cessors of Mark has added notably to the ethical 
contribution of that passage.** Thus there exists 
no need to discuss it further here. 

Once Jesus met some people who were strongly 


% See page 64, footnote 131. 
188 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


of the opinion that the new era was to be ushered 
in very soon,” to whom he addressed the parable of 
the pounds. Possibly these people were Jesus’ 
own disciples. However that may be, his story 
must have given the hearers the impression that 
this teacher did not sympathize with such imme- 
diate expectations. There is much business to do 
in the meantime. 

Upon being asked by certain Pharisees, ‘‘When 
will the Kingdom come?’”® the Master made one 
of his most direct answers, in the words: “The 
Reign of God is within you.” 

Immediately following this answer, says Luke, 
Jesus turned to his disciples with a remark couched 
in apocalyptic language: 

“There shall come the time when you shall 
yearn to see one of the days of the Son of man, 
and you shall not see one.’ 

Thereupon follow the words that appear to be 
related to the synoptic apocalypse. The meaning 
of the expression “one of the days of the Son of 
man’’ is scarcely clear enough here to draw from it 
any specific teaching as to the Kingdom, present 
or future. 

That the Third Evangelist did in a_ sense 
ascribe to Jesus the view that the “‘coming”’ of the 
Kingdom would not be delayed many decades is 
perhaps clear from 9g. 26f.: 

‘““Who-so-ever shall be ashamed of me and my 
words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed 
when he shall come in his glory and in that of 
the Father and of the holy angels. But I say 
to you truly there are certain of those standing 

 % Luke 1g. I1ff. % Luke 17. 20. he 9 fae oP 
189 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


here who shall by no means taste of death until 
they see the Kingdom of God.” 

This saying, placed as it is between the confession 
of Peter at Cesarea Philippi and the Transfigura- 
tion, has a strangely solemn tone. From the con- 
text the reader gathers that the evangelist is en- 
forcing the teaching of Jesus that however soon the 
Kingdom itself may come, the disciple is to espouse 
loyalty to its program even if that means death 
of the body. 

“For whosoever wills to save his life shall 
lose it, and whosoever loses his life for my sake, 
this man shall save his life.’’” 

Jesus spoke similar words to his disciples,’ in 
connection with a warning against the Pharisees: 

“I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who 
kill the body, but who can do nothing further 
than that. But I will show you whom you 
should fear. Fear him who has power after 
he has killed to cast you into Gehenna, yes, I 
tell you, Fear him.”’ 

Luke also puts words on the lips of Jesus that 
describe his own fate in the language of the apoca- 
lyptic writers of his time. Jesus’ message to Herod, 
when warned by his friends among the Pharisees, 
reads: 

““Lo, I cast out demons and accomplish cures 
to-day and to-morrow, and on the third day 
I shall be perfected. . . . You shall not see 
me until the time when you may say: Blessed 
is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” 





% Compare the form of this saying in a similar setting, Matt. 


99, 24. 100 72. 4, 10 Luke 13. 31ff. 
190 


ACCORDING TO LUKE 


Aside from these words and a few of similar import 
scattered here and there, Luke does not stress the 
future aspects of the Reign of God as much as he does 
the development of a better social order with deeply 
ethical foundations in the present world. 

In the ethical program of the Reign of God Luke 
sees more and more importance given to personal 
values, over against the traditional value inherent 
in conventional usage and ancient institutions. 
Class consciousness within the Kingdom is subor- 
dinate to the instinct of brotherhood. No indi- 
vidualism appeals to this evangelist after his study 
of the teaching of Jesus, for the law of social amity 
demands an abiding altruism, subordinating one’s 
property, one’s social position, even one’s national 
pride to the ideal of service for others. 

The view of the Reign of God in the third Gospel 
is specific and concrete rather than abstract. Since 
John Baptist’s time the new order has really been 
in force, hence it is logical to say, ‘‘The Reign of 
God is within you,’ although it is not the special 
privilege of Pharisees nor, indeed, of any one class, 
~ to possess it,!* and all who enjoy its blessings must 
submit to its conditions.’ 

These conditions involve a degree of inner read- 
iness'’® which will show itself in loving service of 
others,” and in a consistent following of the prin- 
ciples of social amity.’ 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 
1. How do you understand the prophecy of the angel 


£816: 16, ane ene 108 73. 28-30. 
106 73, 1-5. 106 71, 37-41. 1077, 44-48. 
108 6, 46-49. 


IgI 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


of the Annunciation, Luke 1. 32f., in its reference 
to ‘“‘the throne of David’’? 

2. In what way does Jesus’ statement about John Bap- 
tist in Luke 7. 28 support the view that John’s 
teaching about the new era was a contemporary 
Jewish view which Jesus repudiated? 

3. What probably was the content of the preaching of 
the Twelve according to Luke 9. 2? 

4. Indicate all the parables in the third Gospel which 
distinctly contribute to our understanding of the 
Kingdom as Luke understood it. 

5. Explain the words ascribed to Jesus in Luke 17. 
22-24, paraphrasing them in terms intelligible to 
the student of to-day. 

. Does Luke mean by his words concerning Joseph of 
Arimatheza (23. 51), that the latter had been in- 
structed by Jesus? Or does “looking for the King- 
dom of God’’ mean simply that he was a pious 
Israelite? See Luke 2. 25. 


Nn 


192 


CHAPTER V 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING 
TO JOHN 


THE FourRTH GOSPEL CONSIDERED AS A SOURCE 
OF ETHICAL TEACHING 


A SINGLE reading of the Gospels informs the 
student that the last of these books dealing with 
Jesus and his teaching differs from all the others 
in many respects. Further study of the Gospel 
according to John shows conclusively that not only 
in style, choice of material, and general perspective, 
but also in aim and purpose, this writer stands 
apart. 

In the synoptic Gospels Jesus talks about the 
Kingdom of God, uses many parables to illustrate 
its different aspects, talks very little about himself, 
but performs many works of mercy upon the needy 
and takes particular interest in the training of 
twelve men to carry on his work after his demise. 

In the fourth Gospel the phrase ‘Kingdom of 
God” scarcely appears, no parables are related by 
the evangelist, Jesus talks continually about himself, 
and but few of his many miracles are detailed. 

Clearly, the aim and purpose of the evangelist 
differed from the design that led the other Gospel 
writers to put their thoughts before their readers. 
The Fourth Evangelist himself in 20.30f., states 
that he gathered his material and wrote his book 
particularly to show that Jesus was Messiah and 


193 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the Son of God, in the hope that his readers would 
receive life through their faith in Messiah Jesus. 

Such an aim is often characterized as “‘didactic,” 
in the sense that the treatise defends a certain point 
clearly stated as its thesis, without being distinctly 
polemical. Some have seen in the fourth Gospel a 
polemical writing, taking issue with certain views 
which seem to its writer contrary to the standard 
belief of his time, but the evidence for this is not 
clear. On the other hand, this writer does not 
seem to be interested in bringing clearly to expres- 
sion Jesus’ thought of a moral program in which 
his followers should unite. Rather, his dominant 
interest seems to lie in expounding the personality 
and the redemptive mission of Jesus. John is inter- 
ested more in the salvation of the individual than 
in the reconstruction of society. 

The recognition of such a plan in the fourth Gos- 
pel might discourage entirely any search for ethical 
teaching within its twenty-one chapters, but for the 
fact that certain social contacts between Jesus 
and the community of his time are detailed and 
reveal in the mind of the writer some rather import- 
ant ethical concepts which were without doubt 
shared by him with other leaders in the church of the 
fourth Christian generation. So there is some war- 
rant for an inquiry into this later statement of the 
ethics of Jesus by a writer who lived at Ephesus 
probably very near the end of the first century, 
A.D. 

About half of the fourth Gospel is taken up with 
an account of the last week in Jesus’ life, thus giving 
but little space to the ministry in Galilee. The 
synoptic Gospels offer abundant details of the 


194 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


Galilean ministry, but give very little place to 
Jesus’ ministry in Judewa. When it is recalled 
that in John there is no story of the Temptation, no 
Transfiguration, no Sermon on the Mount, no 
agony in the garden of Gethsemane, its different 
character is felt, for these are cardinal points in 
the synoptic story.? 

On the other hand there is much discourse mate- 
rial in the fourth Gospel which has no parallel 
whatever in the synoptics. The discourse with 
Nicodemus,” the conversation with the Samaritan 
woman at Jacob’s Well,? the apologia of Jesus,’ 
in which he claims absolute dependence upon the 
Father, the very mystical statements about the 
“bread of life,’ the day after the feeding of the 
great multitude with a small ration of food, the 
homily upon the “living water,’ which is continued 
in the discourse upon the “light of the world,’” to 
which should be added the discourse that had as 
its text the healing of the blind man,® consti- 
tute characteristic portions of Johannine teaching. 
Added to these are the still more formal addresses 
found in chapters ten to seventeen, namely, The 
Good Shepherd, The Abiding-places with the Father, 
The Vine and the Branches, The Coming Paraclete 
or Advocate-helper, The Prayer of Jesus for His 
Disciples. Other remarkable paragraphs of in- 
struction are found in the story of Lazarus,’ at the 
time of the visit of the Greeks,’ on the occasion of 


1 For a very complete list of omissions from the synoptic account 
of Jesus’ life see D. A. Hayes, John and His Writings, pp. 80-88. 


2 John 3. 3-15. 34. 7-26. 45. 19-47. 
5 6, 22-65. Or, 47h 78. 12-20. 

89. 3-5, with the following conversation. 

911. 25ff. 1032, 23ff. 


195 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


the Last Supper,’ and in the appendix of the Gos- 
pel, when after the resurrection Jesus met his dis- 
ciples in Galilee,” and encouraged Peter to continue 
in his service. 

A survey of this teaching of Jesus supports the 
statement that John did not use to any great extent 
the discourses of Mark, Luke, and Matthew when 
he wrote his Gospel. His is not only new material, 
but it has a different quality. | 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


1. After reading all the discourses in the fourth Gospel, 
indicate four which describe Jesus in some striking 
way. Offer your own titles for these discourses. 

2. Compare the conversations of Jesus in the fourth 
Gospel with those in Mark, with especial reference 
to the use of questions. 

3. Gather together as many significant words as possi- 
ble which are used by John and not by the synoptic 
writers. 

4. Investigate the frequency of the words ‘‘truth,”’ ‘‘love,”’ 
“life,” ‘believe’ in the fourth Gospel. 

5. What is the probable date of the Gospel according 
to John? 

6. What persons appear in the fourth Gospel who are 
not found in the other Gospels? 

7. Why is the “pericope adultere,”’ 7. 53—8. 11, con- 
sidered alien to John? 


SOCIAL CONTACTS OF JESUS IN THE FOURTH 
GOSPEL 


The first three Gospels present a portrait of 
Jesus which in no way removes him from intimate 
and sympathetic contact with all phases of the 


43. 12ff., 31ff. 221, 15-22. 


196 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


life of his time. Likewise the fourth Gospel, not- 
withstanding its somewhat different aim, makes 
very much of the real and constant fellowship which 
Jesus enjoyed with men and women of many types. 
If in the synoptics Jesus repeats the insulting words 
hurled at him, “‘a gluttonous man and winebibber,”® 
in the fourth Gospel he is found replenishing the 
supply of wine at a wedding-feast, or holding con- 
versation with a woman whom most Jews would 
hold in contempt,” or walking among a nondescript 
company of sick and crippled folk, whom many 
held to be a source of contamination,” or again, in 
serious discussion with a learned man who had come 
by night to ask the Teacher about his views.” In 
the view of this evangelist, not all the Twelve were 
of the highest and noblest mind, for Jesus is heard 
characterizing Judas as ‘‘a devil,’’® as unclean,” 
and as lifting up his heel against his host, in Old 
Testament phrase,” yet how tender is the Master 
even with this treacherous disciple when they eat 
for the last time together!”! Jesus had a virile word 
for each whom he touched. If he came to the 
house of mourning, both sisters of his own beloved 
friend could say with greatest confidence, that if 
their Master had been with them in the illness of 
Lazarus, his death would not have occurred,” 
and the neighbors, upon seeing the grief of Jesus 
at the grave, remarked upon his love for his friend.” 
When the Teacher sees a vast concourse of pilgrims 
approaching him, on one occasion, he begins to 
counsel with his disciples as to the possibility of 


13 Luke 7. 34. 14 John 2, I-II. 1 4, 7-26. 
165, 2-9. 7 3. I-15, #6270, 19-33, TU. 
2073, 18. 31:53. 2681. A 17) 27,32. 3.71.36; 


197 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


finding food for so many. Even when one whom 
he had befriended was excommunicated from the 
congregation” Jesus still sought him out for further 
inquiry. And the most remarkable though stray 
story of his disposal of the case of a woman charged 
with a breach of moral law”® makes it clear that 
both in the synoptics and in John the Master of 
men and the Teacher of teachers came into vital 
contact with the life that men live, and that at 
times he found the unconventional approach most 
convenient. 

It can scarcely be made out that the Fourth 
Evangelist wrote in order to emphasize these and 
other social phases of Jesus’ life, for his emphasis 
is primarily upon the exalted character of Jesus 
as the Messiah and as divine. The very sympa- 
thetic outlook of Jesus which does find exposition 
in this Gospel, however, illustrates how persistently 
this real side of Jesus continued to characterize the 
memory and tradition as to his teaching while 
among his fellows. 

The insight which Jesus had into the inner nature 
of men’ is vividly portrayed, perhaps in the mind of 
the Fourth Evangelist, as a supernatural trait of 
Jesus, yet discernible to the reader as a genuine 
characteristic of one who “himself knew what was 
in man.’”’ The story of the first disciples of Jesus 
illustrates finely this keen vision of his. A chance 
hearing draws two disciples of John Baptist, one 
of whom was named Andrew, to spend a day with 
Jesus, with such a consequent interest in him that 


4 John 6. 5. In the synoptics the feeding of the five thousand 
takes place after they have been for a day with Jesus, but in the 
fourth Gospel the situation is otherwise described. 

9, 35. % 7. 53—8. II. “alle Wee 1, ¥ 


198 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


they fetch a third, Simon, to whom Jesus gives the 
surname ‘‘Peter’’ (Rock) as soon as he looks upon 
him.”? Another disciple, Philip, Jesus invites to 
follow him, and Philip in turn brings Nathanael, 
who comes with a reluctance which disappears when 
the Master shows that he already knows something 
about him.” 

The woman of Samaria tells with astonishment 
that this prophet opened up her life to her as she 
supposed only she herself knew it,°° and urges her 
fellow townsmen to hear and know him. That this 
invitation was eagerly accepted is witnessed by the 
fact that Jesus remained in Samaria two days and 
convinced these people of his unusual powers. 
When the statement of the evangelist is recalled 
that the Jews regularly avoided intercourse with 
the people of Samaria, this incident speaks eloquently 
of the remarkable ease with which Jesus approached 
even the prejudiced and of the equally remarkable 
insight with which he dealt with the indifferent. 

That the evangelist took particular interest in 
exhibiting this keenness of vision on the part of 
Jesus appears in his parenthetical statement in the 
story of the feeding of five thousand,” “for he knew 
what he would do,” in his account of the withdrawal 
of Jesus from the people when their royalistic 
tendencies become apparent,” and in his character- 
ization of the motives of those who sought him out, 
because they were satisfied with mere bread.** 

Jesus in the fourth Gospel is fully human in his 
interests and in his sympathies. He himself knows 
hunger and fatigue,** he experiences indignation at 


Br, 42. 297, 48f. 30 4, 29. #16, G. 
326. 15. 336, 26. 44. Off. 
199 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


any show of hypocrisy or formality or irrever- 
ence,” he is appreciative of every act of devotion 
or service.*° John portrays Jesus as a teacher who 
possessed that fine sensibility to human need and 
human nature which is a prime necessity in a teacher 
of ethics. 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLass REPORTS 


1. Paraphrase the story of the first disciples of Jesus in 
John 1. 35-51. 

2. How many times in this Gospel does Jesus refer to 
“the Twelve’? Are these to be identified with the 
‘disciples’ of John 7. 3, or are the latter “‘the many”’ 
spoken of in 2. 23? Find, if possible, the names of 
twelve disciples in this Gospel. 

3. Write a five-hundred word essay upon the social life 
of Palestine in Jesus’ day, using material found only 
in the fourth Gospel. 

4. To what extent is John interested in yithe economic 
conditions of the people of Jesus’ day? Compare 
Mark 10. 21; 12. 38ff.; Matt. 9. 36 and similar 
passages. 

5. What element of social service can be found in the 
Johannine accounts of Jesus’ miracles? 


THE JOHANNINE WAY OF EXPRESSING THE MORAL 
THOUGHT AND PROGRAM OF JESUS 


It has appeared in the foregoing pages that the 
aim of the Fourth Evangelist is other than the de- 
tailing of Jesus’ moral teaching to his disciples. In 
fact, the attention of his readers is centered upon 
the person of Jesus as Messiah and Son of God, not 
particularly as a sponsor of a new order which 
should be characterized by a vigorous propaganda 


% 2. 15ff.; II. 33 margin. 36 72, 8; 18. Q-II. 
200 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


in accordance with a program set forth by the 
Master himself. 

One searches in vain for a Johannine counterpart 
to the Sermon on the Mount, for such specific direc- 
tions to Jesus’ followers as are found in Matthew 
ro and Luke 9 and to, for exhortations as to 
brothers who need forgiveness such as are set forth 
in Matthew 18, or for such condemnation of the 
materially minded as Luke offers in many of his 
parables. 

John Baptist, it is true, appears as a teacher of 
righteousness in the fourth Gospeal, but here he 
does not reprove a Herod nor does he give moral 
instruction to the several classes of penitents before 
him. Jesus does not warn his hearers of the scribes 
who ‘‘devour widows’ houses,” he does not charge 
any man to give up his wealth, he raises no such 
large moral issue as that of divorce, he gives no 
advice as to tribute to Cesar. 

In the Gospel according to John one finds the 
moral thought of Jesus recast into such sublime 
concepts as “‘truth,” ‘“‘love,”’ “life,” “‘light,”’ with 
their opposites. This is not to say that John is 
altogether abstract rather than concrete and ob- 
jective, for the performance of one’s duty is plainly 
made the basis of certainty in the ethical life of men. 
“If anyone is willing to do his will, he shall know 
concerning the teaching, whether it is from God or 
whether I speak in’ my own right.’*” At the Last 
Supper Jesus put his friends to a practical test 
involving unselfish service, when he himself took 
the attitude of a servant and washed their feet, 


7.475 compare 13.353: 84.' 85; 15:, 12: 
201 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


assuring them that they had no real part with him 
if they did not share this spirit of willingness to serve. 

This evangelist takes some account of actual 
breach of the moral law on the part of the enemies 
of Jesus, whom he usually characterizes as “the 
Jews.” Their intention of killing Jesus is several 
times pointed out with condemnation. and the 
highly immoral act of Judas Iscariot®® is scathingly 
rebuked. 

The Sabbath question appears in this Gospel, but 
not with the same emphasis as in the synoptics. 
The breaking of the Sabbath is noted,” but the 
evangelist thinks that it is the alleged blasphemy 
of Jesus rather than the desecration of the day 
itself that aroused the anger of the Jews. The 
man who was restored to health is chided for car- 
rying his bed on the Sabbath,*! but the complaint 
is directed back toward Jesus, who told him to take 
up his bed and walk. The Pharisees, it is true, 
argued that Jesus was an impostor because of his 
disregard of the Sabbath,*? but some of the more 
fair-minded among them felt that the remarkable 
deeds which Jesus performed were favorable to his 
character. 

The moral code in its objective demands receives 
further notice in John at the time of the Temple 
cleansing, when Jesus demanded of the traders 
that they cease to make his Father’s house a place 
of business. Here, however, the accusation which 
figures in each of the synoptic stories of the cleansing, 
“You have made it a den of robbers,” is absent. 


3 For example, 7. 19; 8. 37, 40; 10. 31ff. 
APES 2K IR? 2° 6./90. 
405. ob-18. aS LO, 9:36. 


202 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


The tremendous religious zeal of Jesus is empha- 
sized in the Johannine version of this Messianic act: 
“His disciples recalled that it is written, 
Zeal for thy house shall consume me.’’* 
Aside from the comparatively few instances above 
noted, and these with the modifications that appear 
by comparison with the synoptic method, the 
Johannine way of expressing Jesus’ moral thought 
is through the use of high ethical concepts which, 
at the close of the first Christian century, at least 
for the church in Asia Minor, have taken the place 
of the more practical and concrete precepts of the 

synoptics. 

In the prolog of the Gospel, Jesus is described as 
“the true light, which illuminates every man coming 
into the world.’ 

After the Johannine method of antithesis, the 
light is contrasted with darkness, and Jesus declares 
that he himself is “the light of the world,’* the 
context in each case leaving no doubt in the reader’s 
mind that the evangelist has in mind the pursuit of 
a highly moral program in life.*® 

The concept “light” thus suggests that of “‘life,”’ 
which is found frequently in this Gospel,*’ and 
which forms an important vehicle of expression for 
the developing concept of the Reign of God. The 
fullest exposition of this term will find place more 
appropriately in the next section, devoted to the 
Johannine teaching as to the Kingdom of God. 


4 John 2. 17. ide oN A 88512; "12. 46. 

“ Note 12. 47, “If any man hear my sayings and does not keep 
them,” and in 8. 12 compare the use of “‘life’’ with the use of this 
term in I. 4, “In him was life, and the life was the light of men.’ 

47The word for “‘life’’’ occurs more than thirty times in this 
Gospel. The word for “‘light’’ occurs at least twenty-two times, 
nearly twice as frequently as in the synoptics. 


203 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Here the student’s interest lies particularly in 
the use of such a term as “‘life” to express to the 
evangelist’s readers the thought of Jesus in respect 
to the life that men live together, insofar as their 
individual and community life reflects to the evangel- 
ist’s times the ethical ideals of the man of Galilee. 

In 17.3 there is a statement which sounds more 
like a definition of the term: ‘‘And this Is eternal 
life, that they may know thee, the only true God, 
and him whom thou didst send, Jesus Christ.” 

It is life indeed to know the only true God. With 
Mark* the Kingdom ideal involved the develop- 
ment of fine ethical relations between men and men 
and between men and God. With Matthew,* the 
thought of a likeness to the Father (‘“‘sons of your 
Father’) was more clearly developed than with 
Mark. With John, the thought of personal fellow- 
ship with the Father is daringly set forth in such 
words as, “IJ am the way, and the truth, and the 
life; no one comes to the Father except through 
me,’”’® and “He who has my commandments and 
keeps them, this man is one who loves me. 4h, 
And he shall be beloved of my Father,’*! There is 
also emphasis upon the relation between Jesus and 
the disciple, which the synoptists taught. “By 
this shall all men know that you are my disciples,” 
said Jesus, “if you love one another.’** As a con- 
dition of continuance in the life of a disciple the 
Master said: “If you love me keep my command- 
ments.’”? In these sayings, the life that is lived 
is closely associated with the brotherly attitude, 


#8 Pages 70-75 above, ‘‘Ethical Relations between Persons in the 
Kingdom.’ 

49 Page 100 above. 

60 14. 6. 1 54./25, S13) 45. 5314. 15. 


204 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


sympathetic and affectionate, denoted by the Johan- 
nine word “‘love.” 

The statement of 17.3 above quoted is found in the 
prayer which Jesus prayed shortly before his death. 
In the context it appears that the great Teacher 
realized that his work on earth was finished, yet his 
friends must continue to live and work and achieve 
under those very human conditions in which they 
found themselves. The Father is not to take them 
out of the world, yet their life that they live is to be 
in a certain degree of contrast to the life of the 
world. The unity which the company of disciples 
must possess” is to be a personal unity comprising 
the Father and Jesus himself and the disciples. 
And this unity is to involve yet others, not of the 
original band. This presupposes a program of 
activity on their part®® which is very clearly implicit 
throughout the Gospel.” 

The concept “‘light,’’ which merges into that of 
‘life’? in so many places in the fourth Gospel, is 
seen in some of the passages above quoted to dis- 
solve again into the concept “love,’? a favorite 
word with this evangelist.°* In the discourse upon 
the Vine and its Branches Jesus said: ‘‘This is 
my commandment, that you love one another 
just as I loved you.” As if in further exposition of 
love as a moral principle, these words follow: 
“Greater love than this no man possesses, that 
one should lay down his life for his friends.”’ Jesus’ 


ah Ja th 5 me 17a ts £7) 20. 
57 1, 8; 3. 14-16; 4. 39-42; 6. 45; 10. 16; 12. 19, 46; and similar 
passages. 


8 The verb “to love” is used at least forty-four times in John’s 
Gospel; the noun ‘‘love’’ is used seven times. There are two dif- 
ferent verbs used, one being used thirty-four times, the other ten. 

68 35. 12. 


205 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


own example is supreme, as the evangelist has 
already expressed it in the words,” “Having loved 
his own in the world, he loved them to the end.” 

In another place®’ Jesus referred to the command- 
ment to love one another as “a new command- 
ment,’ and here also made the measure of his own 
love for the disciples the standard for love of one 
another in the moral community. 

The fourth Gospel is the latest of all, and behind 
it lies a longer stretch of moral experience for the 
followers of Jesus. That very experience had 
brought to these valiant souls many shafts of light 
to illuminate their way, perhaps at unexpected 
turns, in fulfillment of the words which this evangel- 
ist writes of the Spirit of Truth: “And when he 
comes, the spirit of truth, he will lead you in all 
truth. 962 

The actual words of Jesus hauls not offer, even 
if they were all written down,” complete provision 
for all the future needs of the. disciples. But expe- 
rience taught all the evangelists that a personal 
fellowship would be established between the still 
living Teacher and his followers, which should indeed 
provide for all exigencies. This personal experience 
of the living Jesus John designates in various ways, 
the clearest of all perhaps being his manner of using 
the words, “‘light,’’ “‘life,” “love,” “truth.” 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLAsSs REPORTS 
1. Follow the word “‘life’’ in the fourth Gospel, using a 
Concordance, and report all instances of its use 
which clearly refer to the moral program in which 
the followers of Jesus unite. 


night & Pon yf i i, ¥ 76.) 23. 63 John 20. 30; 21, 25. 
206 | 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


2. Paraphrase John 16. 1-13, bringing to expression the 
various moral attitudes implicit in the passage. 

3. Compare the use of the words “‘life,’”’ ‘‘light,’’ ‘‘love,”’ 
“truth” in the fourth Gospel with their use in the 
synoptics. Note relative frequency as well as dif- 
ferent words for similar English translations. 


THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL 


The phrase “Kingdom of God” appears but 
twice in the fourth Gospel, namely, in 3. 3, 5, both 
times on the lips of Jesus. Again, thrice in 18. 36, 
Jesus uses the expression ‘“‘my kingdom” in address- 
ing Pontius Pilate. Aside from these instances, 
the expression, so frequently met in the synoptic 
Gospels, does not occur in John. 

In Jesus’ use of the term “kingdom” before 
Pilate’s judgment bar one finds practically a denial 
that the Kingdom of God is at home upon earth. 
“My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom 
were of this world, then would my followers strive 
against my betrayal to the Jews. But now my 
kingdom is not from hence.” 

To Nicodemus Jesus said: ‘‘Unless one be born 
from above one cannot see the Kingdom of God.” 
Then more explicitly, ‘Unless one be born of water 
and of the spirit, one cannot enter the Kingdom 
of God.” | 

When the term “Kingdom of God’’ is used so 
sparingly it may be questioned whether the writer 
of this Gospel held the idea which underlies the 
term in the synoptic Gospels. At least his Gospel 
must be investigated carefully with a view to learn- 
ing whether John had dismissed the idea of the 
present or the coming Kingdom or whether he had 


207 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


modified it, or whether possibly he holds the same 
view on the whole, although he does not prize the 
synoptists’ term for the new order taught by them. 

One of the first things to meet the student engaged 
in such an investigation will be the prominence 
given by John to belief in Jesus himself as a condition 
of discipleship, if not even as a condition of per- 
sonal salvation. With the Fourth Evangelist this 
faith is directed more toward the person of Jesus 
than toward his message. John Baptist witnessed 
to Jesus that all men “through him might believe,’ 
the evangelist declares that God sent Jesus into 
the world for the purpose of bringing all to believe 
on him,” and Jesus repeatedly associates belief 
in himself with faith in the Father, “who sent 
him.’*® The individual believer seems to be pointed 
out particularly by the Fourth Evangelist, and 
this interest in the individual probably accounts 
for the absence of specific teaching as to a moral 
community, its mutual obligations and laws. 

Even the group known as “the Twelve” is not as 
prominent in this Gospel as in the synoptics. Once 
the number is mentioned, namely 6. 70, 

“Did I not choose you, the twelve? And of you 
one is a devil.” 

At the Last Supper the number is not named, the 
general term “the disciples’®’ being used. Where 
the synoptists emphasize the number of the twelve, 
(the number is twice mentioned by each in the 
account of the Supper), one finds the statement of 
Jesus in John 13. 21, “One of you shall betray me.” 
John indicates that those who followed Jesus were 

Ae wet HR Lae Te Pine 
we 29; 12) H4y 1%, 9; OF IFO RE 54. 5: 
208 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


numerous. He had ‘more disciples than John 
Baptist,’ “many believed’? when he was at Jeru- 
salem, “many more believed” than the Samaritan 
woman,’ when Jesus spent two days at Sychar, in 
fact, many even of the religious leaders believed 
on Jesus, although they dared not become openly 
his followers.” 

The readers of John’s Gospel would not hesitate 
to associate this group of believers, not all of whom 
were in one “fold,’”’* with the larger group of be- 
lievers who constituted the very churches in which 
this Gospel had its first circulation. Thus the 
Christian of the fourth generation after Jesus would 
accept as a correct designation for himself the terms 
“born of God” and ‘‘son of God,’”* as well as the 
term ‘‘disciple’ or ‘‘believer.’”’ Whatever was 
affirmed of the first disciples would apply to those 
who were numbered among Jesus’ followers at the 
end of the first century. 

In the terms that he chooses the Fourth Evangel- 
ist does not make clear to his reader that the 
Kingdom of God is a moral program which is being 
carried on by the believers in Jesus, for in the few 
places where the name is explicitly used an earthly 
environment is not demanded. One must be ‘‘born 
from above,” or “born of water and of Spirit,” even 
to enter the Kingdom of God. Yet in his conver- 
sation with Nicodemus, Jesus refers to these very 
statements, with others, as having to do with 
“earthly things,’’* in contrast with the “heavenly 
things” which Nicodemus was not prepared to 


understand. Thus,” ‘unless one is born of water 
a Se 49.2. 23. 704, 4I. 7 12, 4af. 
2 Io. 16. Lio Ls, 49/433) % 3, 5. 


209 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


and of Spirit,” one cannot enter the Kingdom. 
Again,’® one who is “born of spirit’? is likened to 
the wind, particularly stressing its invisibility and . 
its mystery. These terms, however, do not as fully 
identify the ethical program of the Kingdom with 
earthly affairs as Matthew does in the Sermon on 
the Mount. The Fourth Evangelist seems partial 
to expressions which turn the attention of his reader 
away from the workaday world. These words he 
puts on the lips of Jesus,’” in one of his most import- 
ant conversations with his disciples: 

‘“‘The spirit is the life-giver; the flesh does 
no good. ‘The words which I have spoken to 
you are spirit and they are life.”’ 

Despite this emphasis upon the spiritual as over 
against the temporal, this last Gospel teaches that 
the disciple of Jesus is one of a cherished group 
whose members live in the midst of an unfriendly 
world,”® yet who enjoy the advantage of the unseen 
support of an influential personal Advocate,’? who 
will reveal to them coming values and who will 
remain a constant personal Counselor in the stead 
of their departed Master. 

The message of the sixteenth chapter of John 
together with that of the fourteenth must have been 
understood by the first readers of the Gospel as 
direct encouragement in their efforts to carry for- 
ward the program of Jesus, including an aggressive 
propaganda in Asia Minor. One can scarcely 
affirm, then, in view of this portion of the fourth 
Gospel, that the moral community made up of 
Jesus’ followers, is not included in the Kingdom of 
God. But all the evidence to be marshaled on both 

PER dl Ga 7 6,63. 7% 16. 1-4. baa de Hy a bc 

210 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


sides leaves the student with the clear impression 
that the Fourth Evangelist puts by far greater 
stress upon the spiritual and unseen aspects of Jesus’ 
program rather than upon the activity of the 
disciple in the workaday world. 

In harmony with this emphasis upon the spiritual 
aspects of the program of Jesus, as the church of 
the third or fourth generation of believers knew it, 
this evangelist repeatedly refers to Jesus himself as 
“‘life’’ and to the “eternal life’? which the disciple 
of Jesus enjoys even while living in this world. 
That which a modern writer would call “‘character” 
John terms “‘eternal life.” 

The most characteristic use of this term in John 
is “‘to have life,” this form being found in more than 
a dozen places.2? A phrase used so frequently by 
a writer challenges his readers’ attention. It must 
represent to the writer’s mind a cardinal principle, 
the exposition of which is his chosen task. Since 
the eschatological expectation of earlier decades 
in the first Christian century does not prevail in 
the thought of this writer, the presumption is that 
this ‘‘eternal life’ stands for a value or an experience 
this side of death. Other passages than those 
above referred to support the view that ‘‘eternal 
life’ and ‘“‘life’ with John represent the experience 
of those who are followers of Jesus. In the Prolog 
Jesus is declared to be “the light of men,” “‘the 
light which illumines every man,” although this 
“light is shining in darkness and the darkness does 
not perceive it,” in the era when the Gospel is 
being written. The worker who engages in propa- 

80 Characteristic are 3. 15f., 36; 5. 24, 39; 6. 40, 47, 54; “to have 
eternal life’; 5. 26, 40; 6. 53; 10. 10; ‘‘to have life.” 

211 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


gating the good news of the Kingdom ‘“‘is gathering 
fruit unto life eternal,’*! and Jesus’ hearers are 
urged to consider the relative values of food that is 
temporary and “the food that abides unto eternal 
life,’®? much as the Sermon on the Mount urges 
men to put emphasis upon the higher personal 
values rather than upon material goods.* 

One of the outstanding metaphors of the fourth 
Gospel is that word of Jesus: “I am the bread of 
life.”*4 In the near context is the explanatory 
statement: “The bread of God is that which comes 
down from heaven and gives life to the world.’ 
Simon Peter understood that the “words of eternal 
life’? which Jesus possessed were of particular avail 
in this life,8* for Jesus had said: “The words that 
I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.’”®” 

This accords with the promise of 8: 12, ““He who 
follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have 
the light of life,’ a promise which assuredly included 
Jesus’ followers while he lived. The words would 
be appropriated with like meaning by the followers 
of Jesus in John’s day. Life, with this evangelist, 
was identified with Jesus himself,°* and he repre- 
sents finely the personal loyalty of Jesus’ friends 
to their Master.2® Thomas will go with Jesus 
even to probable death” and urges his followers to 
accompany him. This personal loyalty is recip- 
rocated by Jesus, who loved his own even to the 
end, and who besought his captors at Gethsemane’s 
gate’! that his friends might go on their way safely. 

81 John 4. 36. 8 John 6. 27. 

83 Matt. 6. rof. 

& John 6. 35, 48. 

= 6 8 6. 68 


34. . 68. 63. 
Tr. 25) TA. 0: 896. 68. 90 7TT. 16. 118, 8b. 


ACCORDING TO JOHN 


It is true that in a few cases the ‘‘life’’ of which | 
John speaks is a living beyond the sphere of this 
world’s activities,” and one has a right to expect 
that a type of experience which merits the term 
“eternal life’? must survive the temporal values 
of this existence. The largest number of instances, 
however, in which the term is used must refer to the 
life of the followers of Jesus in the world that now 
is. 

The Kingdom of God is thus still a vital concept in 
the mind of this latest evangelist, although he does 
not see fit to repeat the term frequently. He under- 
stands that the life within the community whose 
nucleus consisted of the first intimate friends and 
students of Jesus and whose extent was, in his own 
time, well-nigh empire wide, is in reality the per- 
‘sonal life of Jesus, still present within the Christian 
community, even though no longer in the flesh. 
“It is the spirit that gives life.” 


ASSIGNMENTS FOR CLASS REPORTS 


. Investigate the frequency with which the term ‘‘King- 
dom of God” occurs in Paul’s writings, in Mark, in 
John’s Apocalypse. Note the dates of these writings 
and compare this usage with that in the synoptics 
and in the fourth Gospel. What conclusions can 
you draw from the data obtained? 

2. Write an exposition of the fifteenth chapter of John’s 
Gospel, pointing out particularly its ethical teaching. 

. Paraphrase John 6. 26-40. 

. Investigate the use of the word “salvation” in each 
of the four Gospels. To what extent is the Johan- 
nine view of salvation strictly ethical? 


~ 


> WwW 


*® For example, 5. 29; 10. 28; 12. 25. 


213 


CHAPTER VI 


THE ETHICS OF THE GOSPELS AND THE 
ETHICS OF JESUS 


Tue PROBLEM OF IDENTIFYING THE ETHICAL 
TEACHING OF JESUS WHEN ONLY SECONDARY 
SourcES ARE AT HAND 


AT least four men in the early church who were 
sympathetic with that movement known first as 
The Way and later as Christianity left to posterity 
their views of Jesus’ teaching as that teaching was 
held in their time and place. In the foregoing 
pages the work of these men has: been studied 
inductively, with a view to finding in each case the 
important elements of early Christian ethics. 

No writing from the pen of Jesus exists. A few 
Aramaic words are found imbedded in the Gospels, 
transliterated and in some cases explained by a 
corresponding Greek word.! But no modern student 
may expect to look upon any primary source of the 
Master’s teaching. The Gospels stand as the only 
reliable sources of that original teaching. 

If it were true that Jesus’ teaching was entirely 
new and wholly original in content as well as in form, 
then the student might well doubt whether a suc- 
cessful attempt could ever be made to restore the 
oral teaching of the Galilean prophet from the 

1Among these are Raca, Matt. 5. 22; Beelzebub (Beelzebul), 
Matt. 10. 25; 12. 24, 27; Luke 11. 15 et al.; Talitha cumi, Mark 5. 41; 


yo eel eee, Mark 7. 34; Abba, Mark 14. 36 and Eli, Eli, lama 
sabachthani? Mark 15. 34; Matt. 27. 46. 


214 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


written records of a generation or two after his death. 
The evangelists themselves, however, do not assure 
their readers that the teaching of Jesus was some- 
thing overwhelmingly new and unrelated to the 
contemporary ethical teaching of Judaism. Mat- 
thew adds to his form of the Golden Rule,’ “for this 
is the law and the prophets.” Mark points out 
that Jesus directed the attention of the wealthy 
inquirer® to the Decalog when asked, ‘“‘What shall 
I do to inherit eternal life?” Luke indicates appro- 
val by the Master of the Jewish scribe who cited 
the words of Deut. 6. 4 and Lev. 19. 18 as the sub- 
stance of high moral endeavor. Jesus said to the 
scribe: ‘‘Do this and you shall live.’ 

The evangelists assure their readers that Jesus 
repeatedly appealed to the prophets of the eighth 
and seventh centuries before his time with high 
approval.? There is good reason to suppose that 
Jesus read other Jewish books than those found 
in the law and the prophets, books which reflected 
the moral thinking of enlightened men of the few 
generations immediately preceding him. Among 
these books were probably the wisdom book of the 
son of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), The Testaments of 
the Twelve Patriarchs and others, including many 
contemporary Pharisaic writings and a number of 
apocalypses. 

While the evangelists appear to vary between 
themselves in their interest in the universal spread 
of the Kingdom, they are all agreed that the moral 
community taught by the Master took its rise within 


2 Matt. 7. 12. 3’ Mark tro. 17ff. 4Luke 10. 25-27. | 
5 See Matt. 5. 17; 9. 13; 12. 18ff.; 13. 14ff.; 15. 8f.; Luke 4. 18-21 
and similar places. Review pages 58-60 above. 


215 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Judaism and that its cardinal principles were not 
other than those which experience had taught to be 
morally sound. 

The historical approach to the problem as to 
Jesus’ original teaching thus finds a substantial 
element of that teaching in the tried and true moral 
principles of the great teachers of Judaism. For 
by analogy with later development in moral think- 
ing and ethical codes it must be that no abrupt break 
with prevalent moral thought could be tolerated 
by one who looked upon Judaism as his ancestral 
religion and who sought, prophetlike, to rid that 
religion of immoral theory and practice. . 

Fortunately, much research has been made within 
the realm of Jewish moral teaching, thus offering 
the student a very abundant and well-certified mass 
of material with which to reconstruct the moral 
environment into which Jesus came.® This rela- 
tively recent interest in the Jewish background of 
the Lord’s teaching has done much to stimulate the 
historical study of the teaching of Jesus as found in 
the Gospels, with the result that the essentials of 
Jesus’ own teaching are better certified than ever 
before.’ sine 

An assured result of such investigation is the 
conviction that in the case of Christian ethics there 
was noticeable development within the first few 
generations. It may be shown, in fact, that during 


6 Notable among these works are Thomas Walker, The Teaching 
of: Jesus and the Jewish Teaching of His Age; J. M. P. Smith, The 
Moral Life of the Hebrews; H. G. Mitchell, Ethics of the Old Testa- 
ment; G. Friedlaender, Jewish Sources of the Sermon on the Mount. 

7 The student is referred to such recent works as those of E. F. 
Scott, The Ethical Teaching of Jesus; A. C. Headlam, The Life and 
Teaching of Jesus the Christ; E. I. Bosworth, The Life and Teach- 
ing of Jesus. | 


216 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


the first three generations of Christian believers there 
was a more rapid and vital development in moral 
thinking than in many similar periods before or 
after. The words of the Fourth Evangelist; ‘‘Re- 
member the word that I said to you, a servant is 
not greater than his master,’® are charged with the 
meaning that new light often came to the disciple 
as he ‘‘remembered”’ such words. The statement 
as to the Paraclete, “He shall guide you in all 
truth’”® implies strongly that during the inter- 
vening years the followers of Jesus had learned new 
things concerning right living which the Master 
had not explicitly taught. 

These conclusions carry with them certain impli- 
cations. Since no evangelist was aware that he 
was writing a Bible portion, but, rather, was per- 
suaded that his message was designed for a partic- 
ular person or group of his acquaintance, each 
writer of Jesus’ life or words felt free to edit even 
the written accounts that came to his hand. Luke 
admits that many others had attempted such 
written accounts,” and he himself noticeably de- 
pends upon the earlier account of Mark, yet he 
feels free to omit the narrative of Jesus’ visit to the 
regions of Tyre and Sidon, the feeding of the four 
thousand, and other very interesting episodes from 
his own narrative. Matthew likewise feels free to 
omit many questions from Jesus’ lips as: found in 
Mark, although there is excellent evidence to show 
that Mark’s account formed the basis of the ae 
Gospel.” 


8 John 15. 2 9 John 16. 13. 10 Luke I. 1. 

1 Allen, isSaint Matthew,”’ International Critical Commentary, 
p. Xxxii, offers eleven instances of such omission, apparently on 
principle. 


217 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Sometimes these changes appear to be the result - 
of some principle, perhaps the rise of a higher degree 
of reverence for the Twelve, which in the day of the 
First Evangelist led him to leave out some words 
which seemed to him below the dignity of these 
apostles. In other instances an adaptation of the 
message to his circle of readers is clear. In illus- 
tration of the latter Mark ro. 12 may be cited. 
Here the Second Evangelist includes a case that is 
allowed by Roman law, the divorcing of a husband 
by a wife. Mark is writing for Roman readers. 
But in Palestine, where no woman had the right 
to divorce her husband, the original words probably 
did not embrace such a supposed case. 

The problem of reaching the original teaching of 
Jesus is thus by no means hopeless, although too 
great a degree of optimism and assurance should not 
sway the student. He has at hand the well-tested 
literary and historical principles which have wrought 
well in this field and in others. He has also at hand 
fairly well certified copies of the Greek Gospels, with 
many competing readings, yet with no very essential 
variation. The student finds encouragement in 
the present high degree of assurance that the evangel- 
ists were sympathetic with the movement whose 
rise they chronicle, and in at least one case, that 
of Luke, there is excellent assurance of his character 
as a careful and accurate recorder of details as his 
sources bring them to him. 

The inductive study of all four Gospels brings 
still further confidence that there is no vital contra- 
diction between any two writers as to the nature 
of Jesus’ teaching, although each writer uses his 
own style, shapes his message for his own con- 


218 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


stituency, edits his material as he finds desirable, and 
often expresses his own views, which may in no real 
sense be a part of the express teaching of Jesus. 

To one who is able successfully to adopt the point 
of view of the writers and first readers of these 
Gospels there is a high degree of expectation pos- 
sible in apprehending the original message of Jesus. 
Such an achievement results from a consistent use 
of a knowledge of the times and their needs, from an 
application of the law of probability as based on a 
knowledge of the psychology of the Oriental and 
from that wider knowledge of the total development 
of moral thought within the Jewish Church and the 
Christian Church of the first three or four gener- 
ations. 


THE SAYINGS OF JESUS 


Early writers in the Christian Church felt a degree 
of certainty in regard to the genuine sources of the 
four Gospels, and statements from some of these 
writers embody a tradition that Peter and other 
eyewitnesses of the Lord’s ministry were respon- 
sible for the sayings of Jesus found in such number 
in the works of the evangelists. Luke makes 
special mention of written sources to which he had 
access and in all the Gospels there is implicit 
testimony to the existence of a somewhat wealthy 
store of sayings which had been passed on from 
mouth to mouth for a greater or shorter time before 
the teaching thus transmitted orally was incorpo- 
rated in one or another of the written accounts of 
Jesus’ life. © 


2 Luke I. I-4. 
219 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


If in preceding chapters the student has become 
impressed with the fact that he has at hand only 
secondary sources, namely, the writings of men of a 
generation or two after Jesus, he may still be reas- 
sured that such an impression is doubtless true to 
the literary: situation. At this point, however, it 
will be well to call attention to some of the orig- 
inal elements in the Gospels, which appear to bring 
one very close indeed to the spoken word of Jesus 
himself. 

Certain principles of literary criticism aid one who 
seeks to identify those sayings that have been least 
affected by the process of their transmission. These 
principles are to be invoked also in the following 
section in exhibiting the manner in which some of 
the teaching of Jesus has been modified or expanded 
by this same process of transmission. Not all the 
original sayings can be identified, by any means, 
nor can all the modifications or expansions of the 
teaching be traced. Still there is sufficient evidence 
to establish both types of teaching, namely, the 
relatively unchanged oral teaching of Jesus and the 
literary work done by the evangelists upon much of 
the teaching.” 

Each evangelist has a style of his own. This can 
be readily identified and has been pointed out in 
each case by life-long students of the Gospels. In 
many places where the three synoptic writers have 
made use of the same material each evangelist has 


13 The limitations of this work render it impossible to go at 
length into the question of sources of the Gospels and equally 
impossible to make an exhaustive catalog of the sayings that can 
be identified. The method here pointed out should be useful 
in completing such a study, however. 


220 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


modified or edited that material after his own way.“ 
But in other places where three, or two or one of the 
synoptic writers have used material from their 
sources they have left it apparently in the form 
in which they found it. This form may then be 
ascribed to the compiler or editor of some literary 
source now lost, or to the speaker of the words 
himself. In the case of sayings orally transmitted 
one must make allowance for the accidents of trans- 
lation from one language to another, for example, 
from Aramaic to Greek, thence to English, yet in 
substance the style of the transmitted saying may 
not be essentially changed. It is in this relatively 
unaltered mass of sayings that one is certain to find 
the most nearly primitive or original material. 

In his teaching Jesus appears to use the method 
of Socrates very frequently. In the second Gospel 
many instances of the question are on Jesus’ lips. 
If some of these questions are suppressed by another 
evangelist who used the second Gospel, it can be 
shown that this is to be accounted for by an edi- 
torial process, the evangelist being influenced by 
his own view that to ask many questions, some of 
them apparently for the acquisition of information, 
did not befit the Messiah. 

One of the oldest sources of the Gospels may be 
found in the document used by Luke, especially in 
chapters 9 to 18. Here is a large block of discourse 
material, in the form of parables, table-talk, and 
occasional conversations. No doubt may reasonably 
be held that in this primitive source is found the 
form of Jesus’ sayings as well as much of their sub- 


4 The following section will offer detailed illustrations of such 
practice. 


225 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


stance. It is not likely that the Master indulged 
in extensive lectures or sermons. Rather, he used 
each opportunity that offered itself for illustration 
of the principles of right living and character devel- 
opment which filled his thought. 

In the light of the foregoing, those words of Jesus 
found in the Gospels which have a pithy, quotable 
form are likely to be a part of that tradition which 
has preserved the essence of the unforgettable 
sentences uttered in conversation, in repartee, in 
challenge to hesitating or doubting aes or in 
withering criticism of adversaries. 

For illustration note such sayings as ‘You are the 
salt of the earth. . . . You are the light of the 
world.” The former has an echo in Mark 5. 34, 
“Salt is good,” not, of course, a parallel but another 
saying altogether. Again, ‘‘Come to me, all who are 
laboring and are heavy laden and I will give you 
ease; take my yoke upon you and learn of me, for 
I am of a meek and lowly spirit, and you shall find 
rest for your souls,’’® appearing in no parallel 
place, bears in its form good evidence of originality. 
In the synoptics generally Jesus is not represented as 
talking much about himself, but much about God 
and about right living. This exceptional passage 
does not take its form from any recognized Matthean 
literary trait, nor from the thesis of the Gospel 
itself. It breathes rather directly the spirit of the 
Prophet of Nazareth himself, as that spirit is re- 
vealed under the literary forms of the several 
evangelists and through their own chosen aims in 
writing. 

An illustration from the so-called ‘triple tra- 

16 Matt. 5. 13f. 16 Matt. 11. 28-30. 

222 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS | 


dition” occurs in the parallels to Mark ro. 31, exactly 
reproduced in Matt. 19. 30, with the exception of 
“the” before the second “‘last,’ also reversed in 
order in Matt. 20. 16, which order corresponds to 
the saying in Luke 13. 30, as shown in the following: 


Matthew Mark Luke 
“And many first “And many first ‘And lo, there are 
shall be last and last shall be last and last who shall be 
first.”’ (19. 30.) the last first.” first, and there are 
(10, 31.) first who shall be 
“Thus the last shall Nu dastsii i (h3.090)) 


be first and the first 
last.’”’ (20. 16.) 


Aside from the nature of the sayings just illus- 
trated, there is a significance in the discovery that 
Matthew especially uses the same saying frequently 
in at least two different contexts. These ‘‘doub- 
lets’ may well be original sayings of Jesus now 
found in other than the original setting. Such a 
familiar passage, for example, as the Lord’s Prayer 
occurs in two Gospels in quite different contexts, 
namely, in Matt. 6. off. and in Luke 11. 1ff. A 
comparative study of the Beatitudes in Matthew 5 . 
and in Luke 6 will reveal some doublets but more: 
differences than similarities. It is probably impos- 
sible now to determine whether the original saying 
with Jesus was “Happy are you poor,” ‘‘Happy are 
the poor,” or “Happy are the poor in spirit.” But 
in Matthew occur some remarkable doublets which 
seem to point to an original form of the words, while 
the context or occasion of the saying remains in 
doubt. Take, for example, the saying: ‘‘He that 
endures to the end, the same shall be saved,’’” once 
used in the address to the Twelve in Galilee, again 
in the apocalyptic words spoken on the Mount of 

7 Matt. 10. 22b.; 24. 13. 

223 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


Olives. Again, the words, “‘There shall be the 
weeping and the gnashing of teeth,” occur in the 
application of the story of the talents and in con- 
nection with Jesus’ commendation of the faith of 
the centurion of Capernaum. Other interesting 
doublets of a similar character occur.” 

The style of Jesus as a speaker was no doubt 
influenced by the style of the Scriptures in which 
he was instructed. There are certainly many 
quotations from the Old Testament which are his 
own citations from Holy Writ as he addressed the 
multitudes. But also there are to be found words 
placed by the evangelists upon Jesus’ lips which 
bear the Old Testament form of parallelism, just 
as other words bear the form of the Beatitude, so 
frequently found in the Jewish Scriptures. The 
following ‘‘words of Jesus’ are cotiched in the 
parallel or balanced measure so often encountered 
in Proverbs, Psalms and other Old Testament or 
intertestamental books. 

“The healthy have no need of a physician, but 
those who are ill.’’° ‘The disciple is not above 
his teacher, nor the slave above his lord.’”! “And 
whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled and 
whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.’ 


6.8, 12D; 25, 30. 

19 The following are suggested for study: Matt. 18. 8-9 compare 
5. 30, 29; 12. 39 compare 16. 4; 10. I5 compare II. 24; 10. 39 com- 
pare 16. 25; 16. I9b compare 18. 18; 17. 20 compare 21. 21; 25. 29 
compare 13. I2; 24. 42 compare 25. 13. 

20 Matt. 9. 12, compare also Mark 2. 17 and Luke 5. 31. 

21 Matt. 10. 24. 

2 Matt. 23. 12, and note the persistence of this saying in Matt. 
18. 4; Luke 14. 11 and 18. 14. The Beatitudes possess this rhyth- 
mic form to a remarkable degree. See also such sayings as Matt. 
5. 22, 38-42, 43-46; 16. 24-25; Mark 6. 4; 10. 29-30; 12. 38-40; 
Luke 7. 28; 8. 10; 9. 50; 10. 20; II. 39; 12. 33-343 13. 32; 14. IT; 
18. 29-30; 21. 3-4; 22. 42 and many others. 


224 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


Some of Jesus’ sayings in the Gospel stand quite 
loosely connected, if connected at all in sense with 
their context. This phenomenon, from a literary 
point of view, may be explained possibly by the 
supposition that some accident happened to the 
manuscript at an early date. Orit may be supposed 
that the compiler of the Gospel saw some connec- 
tion which is not now apparent to an Occidental, 
twentieth-century reader. A very possible expla- 
nation is to be found in the theory that these semi- 
detached sayings occur in their original form, rep- 
resenting a part of the teaching of Jesus which has 
been unaltered yet whose context is entirely lost 
even to the evangelist. It is to him so obviously 
a part of the actual discourse of Jesus that he in- 
sists upon including it in his written work even 
though its setting is partly unharmonious. 

The student has already noted that Matthew 
incorporates the Lord’s Prayer in the Sermon on 
the Mount at the expense of a disarrangement of 
the symmetrical arrangement of the discourse, a 
symmetry in which that evangelist delighted. So 
Luke introduces into chapter 12 of his Gospel the 
words, so clearly original with the Master, ‘“‘Fear 
not, little flock, for your Father is pleased to give 
you the Kingdom.’ 

The saying may be suggested by the reference to 
the Kingdom in verse 31, “‘seek his kingdom,” but 
the connection of verse 33 with 32 is most difficult 
to ascertain. 

More striking than this example is the saying on 
divorce, Luke 16. 18. There is no possible logical 
connection before or after these words, yet the 

3 Luke 12. 32. See Bruce, The Kingdom of God, p. 118. 

225 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


logion itself is unmistakably like other declarations 
in Mark and Matthew, which, apart from the re- 
strictive clause in Matthew 5. 32 and 19. g, are 
subject to no debate as to their originality. 

Another passage, also from the third Gospel, 
which bears strong marks of originality and yet 
which is very loosely connected with its ech 
setting, is Luke 9. 49-50: 

‘“‘And John answered, saying, Master, we saw 
a certain man casting out demons in thy name, 
and we forbade him, because he did not follow 
with us. And Jesus said to him, Forbid not; 
for he who is not against us is for us.”’ 

The passage occurs also in Mark g. 38-40, where 
the preceding context is like that of Luke, although 
the following context in Mark seems to relate the 
logion somewhat to the incident of the child.* In 
Luke, however, 9. 51 marks the beginning of the 
so-called “ong insertion,’ which has no parallel 
in the other Gospels. 

Not too much weight should be attached to the 
existence of such sayings loosely connected with 
their context in an attempt to show that these 
detached logia are like “pebbles washed up and left 
on the shore of the stream of tradition,’ with no 
possibility of ever finding the place from which they 
were wrenched, but in connection with all the con- 
siderations above offered, this literary item should 
have some weight. 

To sum up what has been said in regard to the 
nearly original elements of Jesus’ teaching, it 
appears that the Gospel writers, although differing 


4 Mark 9g. 36f.; Luke 9. 47f. 259, 51—18. 14. 
226 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


between themselves in style, in word choice, in 
aims, and in their circle of readers, have incor- 
porated much discourse or conversation material 
in its original form. This appears not so much 
from the fact that such material is found in twofold 
or threefold tradition,—that is, in two or three 
parallel places in the Gospels—as from the character 
of the sayings, from their relation to their context 
or contexts when they appear as “doublets,” and 
from the style of the sayings considered as a body, 
apart from the style of the several evangelists. 

These men were within a generation or two of 
Jesus’ time. Mark at least enjoyed the intimacy 
of a chief apostle, and Luke acknowledges his 
indebtedness to sources, most of which were doubt- 
less in writing. Matthew abounds most of all in 
“doublets” and thus lays himself lable to the 
assertion that he placed his material in artificial 
settings, to serve best his purposes in writing. Luke 
offers much teaching material not found in the 
other synoptics. Yet a study of the material 
incorporated in this “synoptic tradition’? seems 
bound to result in the conviction that the ‘‘logia 
of Jesus,” as an early tradition terms these sayings 
of the Lord, are not far from the reader of the 
Gospel pages. 

Freedom of arrangement was the evangelists’ 
privilege. Chronological accuracy was not sought, 
nor even desired, by the writers, and no one of them 
set out to write a life of Jesus. But each in his 
own way set out to tell a particular story out of 
that most remarkable life and in doing so each man 
accurately and vividly portrayed to his readers 
the spirit of the Great Teacher, the character of his 


227 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


supreme self-sacrifice in behalf of men whom he 
loved, and the essence of his words which became 
richer in ethical portent with the years. No earnest 
student of the Gospels need doubt that the Prophet 
of Nazareth speaks rather directly through his 
sympathetic interpreter, the evangelist. 


THE EVANGELISTS AND THE WORDS OF JESUS | 


In the foregoing section an attempt was made to 
identify the words most nearly original with Jesus. 
There was found reason to suppose that even when 
the Gospel writer permitted words of the Teacher 
to lose their original form he still preserved their 
thought as he understood it. It has further ap- 
peared that in many cases Jesus’ words came to a 
writer with no context or with one not original. 

At this point it will be fitting to turn some 
attention to the freedom which the evangelists used 
in their disposition of Jesus’ teaching and to inquire 
not only as to the extent of that freedom but also 
as to its warrant in the minds of the Christian 
writers and possibly of their readers. First of all, 
the purpose of a writer, the needs of his circle of 
readers and his own view of Jesus and his teaching 
greatly influenced his choice and disposition of 
narrative and discourse material. 

The Fourth Evangelist writes to support the 
thesis that Jesus is Messiah and that he is Son of 
God. From the beginning to the end of his work 
this thesis is prominent. In order to present Jesus 
as Messiah in the most effective manner, John takes 
an outstanding Messianic act of the Master, namely, 
his ridding the Temple of its profiteering traders, 
and places it at the very beginning of his story. 

228 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


Along with it is the account of a miracle, which is a 
‘“‘sign’’ of Jesus’ Messiahship, the miracle of turning 
water to wine. The probable historical position of 
the Temple cleansing is at the close of the ministry 
and all three synoptics agree in placing it at the 
beginning of Passion Week. The thesis of neither 
synoptic writer demands that the episode be taken 
out of its historical position. No criticism need be 
brought against John because he exercised this 
freedom in replacing the Temple cleansing, just as 
no criticism of his emphasis upon the Judean 
ministry of Jesus is in place. Each Gospel writer 
exercised equal freedom when his aim demanded 
it. 

The Fourth Evangelist seems now and then to 
offer comments and interpretations upon words 
of Jesus, often in such a way that it is quite impos- 
sible to tell where, even in the writer’s intention, the 
words of Jesus end and the writer’s comments 
begin. John 3. 16 is often quoted as Jesus’ words, 
but these words may form the beginning of an 
extensive comment of the writer, including 3. 16-21, 
to which perhaps 3. 31-36 should be added. In 
a number of places the evangelist indicates that 
he is offering a comment, as in 6. 64b: ‘“‘For Jesus 
knew from the beginning who they were who did not 
believe.”’ Again, the writer inserts a well-marked 
affidavit, as 19. 35; ‘“‘An eyewitness has testified 
and true is his testimony.” Or he offers explana- 
tions of Jesus’ words, in such places as 2. 22; 7. 
BUR 51-533 12: 10, 20. aon. 

The synoptic writers are in general agreed as to 
the course and the content of Jesus’ ministry and 
teaching. But this unanimity does not extend 


229 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


to details, and in places agreement gives way to 
' variation or even to contradiction. 

In general, there is greater agreement between 
Mark and Matthew than between any other two 
writers. Almost all of Mark can be found within 
the First Gospel. Yet here and there it is possible 
to find places in which the differing view of Jesus’ 
person or of his work leads to a revision of the saying, 
to a suppression of detail or again to expansion of 
a thought. Matthew does not find the narrative 
of Peter’s sorry attempt to walk upon the water of 
the lake in Mark, his narrative source, notwith- 
standing Peter is believed to be Mark’s chief source 
of information.2® On the other hand, Matthew 
omits Mark’s narrative of the healing of a deaf and 
dumb man,” perhaps because the First Evangel- 
ist would hesitate to include a story in which 
Jesus made a second attempt before his cure was 
complete. This involves a way of thinking about 
Jesus which in Matthew’s time and place was 
somewhat different from that which prevailed in 
the Roman church in Mark’s time.” 

Illustrative of individual coloring of the same 
episode are two found in the Marcan and Mat- 
thean versions of the healing of the demoniac who 
lived in the tombs and in the cursing of the fig 
Lec. 

In the first of these two narratives Matthew 
tells of two men possessed with demons” while 


2% The parallel accounts are found in Matt. 14. 22-33 and Mark 
6. 45-52. 

71 Mark 7. 32-37, and note 8. 22-25. 

*% Allen, “St. Matthew,” International Critical Commentary, 
Pp. Xxxl, offers many striking changes due to ‘‘an increased feeling 
of reverence for the person of Christ.” 29 Matt. 8. 28-34. 


230 


» THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


Mark®* tells of only one. In the second illustration*®! 
the First Evangelist greatly condenses the story 
and intensifies it by the statement, ‘‘The fig-tree 
withered immediately,” while, according to Mark, 
the adjuration of Jesus upon the tree was uttered 
one day and it was discovered withered the next 
morning. 

It is supposed by some that Matthew’s higher 
sense of the dignity of the Twelve led him to say 
in his account of the ambitious request of James 
and John® that “‘the mother of the sons of Zebedee” 
made the request, although Mark states cate- 
gorically that James and John made their own 
request.*? 

In respect to discourse material, Matthew and 
Luke have much in common, yet significant changes 
take place in parallel sections. The Golden Rule 
is a case in point. The two versions are as follows: 


Matt. 7. 12 Luke 6. 31 

“All things, therefore, what- “And just as you will that 
soever you would that men men should do to you, also do 
should do to you, do thus also to them likewise.” 
to them; for this is the law and 
the prophets.” 

The Golden Rule illustrates very well the freedom 
each writer had in phrasing his material. The 
addition, “for this is the law and the prophets,” 
may be original or it may be an addition made 
by the evangelist to express his view that Jesus 
taught essentially the highest moral truth known 
among the Jewish people.** It is not desirable to 


30 5, I-20. 31 Mark 11. 12-14, 20-21; Matt. 21. 18-19. 

2 Matt. 20. 20-28. 3% Mark 10. 35-45. 

34 See also Matt. 10. 29 and Luke 12. 6, consulting Deissmann, 
Light from the Ancient East, p. 270-273; Matt. 11. 12 and Luke 
16. 16; Matt. 12. 33 and Luke 6. 43-45, comparing the expanded 
form of the saying in Matt. 7. 16-20. 


yER 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


multiply illustrations, for those already adduced 
make clear to the student, first of all, that the evan- 
gelists exercised considerable freedom in their use 
of Jesus’ sayings; secondly, that in repeated instances 
the modifications or expansions throw some light 
upon the view or the background of the writer, 
without seriously clouding any message that Jesus 
meant for his contemporaries; and, thirdly, that the 
Gospel record of Jesus’ teaching, in its fourfold 
form, witnesses definitely to a developing thought 
about Jesus and his message. 

The first Gospel preserves a view of Jesus which 
was characteristic of the Jewish Christian Church in 
Palestine or at least in Syria, perhaps about 75 A. D. 
The second Gospel represents not only an earlier 
period but a different group, namely, the church at 
Rome, composed of both Jewish and Gentile people, 
in the seventh decade of the first century. The 
third Gospel is designed for a circle of readers in 
the Greek world, probably for Macedonia in par- 
ticular. Its date need not be set far from that of 
Matthew. The fourth Gospel, from a still later 
period, probably the last decade of the first century, 
is adapted to the thought of Greek Christians in 
Asia Minor. 

The ethical message contained in them all is to 
be summed up in the concluding section of this 
study. That message was, of course, the message 
of the Man of Nazareth, addressed to people all of 
whom were within the Jewish Church, which was 
Jesus’ own church. It was a message which dealt 
with very ancient moral truth, although some of 
this old truth needed and received new and striking 
emphasis. Because it was fundamentally true, 


232 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


essentially adapted to make human society more 
effective, and probably because the original message 
contained such a vital appeal to Jesus’ contem- 
poraries, these various settings devised by sympa- 
thetic followers of Jesus enhanced rather than 
dimmed the luster of the gem itself. 

It is not too much to say that the moral message 
of Jesus is worth even more to readers who lived 
later than the first century A. D. because men of 
that century forged the old Aramaic Gospel anew, 
shaping it upon the anvils of their own experience, 
than it could be if brought down in a letter-perfect 
tradition without the tempering of those several 
generations of experience. The message of Jesus 
plus the experience of his followers constitutes the 
message of the Gospels. 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF JESUS 


The moral thought of Jesus was not cast into 
any system. His was not the type of mind that 
delights in logical refinements, but, rather, he is 
seen to be a social prophet, busy in shepherding the 
neglected and in encouraging the poor and the dis- 
heartened. His voice was raised in prayer that the 
Lord of the harvest would send laborers with him 
into the field white but neglected. He called all 
the laboring and the burdened to his feet, where 
they should find rest. His thought was for the 
lost sheep of Israel’s house, for the sick and not for 
the sound, for the sinful but not for the righteous. 

The moral principles of Jesus have sometimes 
been systematized by later writers, but he himself 
appears in the Gospels to be the minister of all, 
whose eye was clear for the discernment of any 


233 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


need that was buttressed by faith, whose ear was 
attentive to the sigh of discouragement and to the 
faint cry for help. Jesus was, it may be, the poet 
of the waving wheat, of the rippling wave, of the 
lily of the field, of the falling sparrow, whose tragedy 
was not lost upon his Father, and of the glistening 
raindrop or the shining sun, which betokened to 
him the generous provision of God for his enemies 
as well as for his friends. But the mind of Jesus 
was not that of the systematic teacher. 

The ethical teaching of Jesus comprises but few 
principles when all are brought together. Possibly 
those are right who think that in the phrase ‘‘King- 
dom of God” may be found the one subject of his 
instruction. Many similes open the meaning of 
the Reign of God to readers of the Gospels, for its 
human aspects are many. Into this term Jesus 
put tremendous meaning, not exhausted by all 
four evangelists. The new order itself Jesus set 
up in his own time, selecting the men who were 
to form its nucleus and calling to others: “The 
Reign of God is here! Turn your feet toward it 
and cooperate with those who are seriously bring- 
ing in the new day!” 

The Reign of God, in Jesus’ thought, touches 
human life in all its phases. To the extent to which 
the sway of God prevails in human living, to that 
extent life will become wholesome, happy, effective 
and fruitful of good. Human life itself is, then, the 
field of ethics. Jesus’ term, “‘the Reign of God,” 
was taken from the lips of others, some of whom 
lived before the Master’s time, but in Jesus’ meaning 
it stood for a fellowship or community of men and 
women who were characterized by an absence of 


234 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


selfish insistence upon rights for their own sake, and 
by a devotion to all such constructive service of 
others as should bring out the best in human person- 
ality. Such a regime is least of all individualistic. 
The greatest in the community is the servant of 
alles 

In the development of right relations with others, 
Jesus taught, the citizens of the Kingdom as sons 
of the Father would forgive readily, would prac- 
tice nonresistance, would be generous and kind, not 
holding any grudge nor seeking revenge for evils 
done to them. None of these things were to be 
practiced by the son of the Father for its own sake, 
but for the sake of the community at large. 

Explicit teaching of Jesus no doubt lay at the 
root of whatever universalism® is found in the 
Gospels. But one may doubt that Jesus included 
in his direct instruction of the Twelve all of the 
teaching which the more catholic of the evangel- 
ists based upon the actual expansion of “‘the Way” 
in their time. Clearly, in Jesus’ thought, all men 
may become “‘sons of the Father,” since all the race 
is one. Luke, in the sequel to his Gospel,® reports 
a word of Paul as to this unity of the race, which 
reflects the conviction of at least part of Jesus’ 
followers in the sixth decade of his century. If 
it be asked whether Jesus’ thought included the 


% The term “universalism” as used here means the universal 
appeal of Christianity to the world, without distinction between 
Jew and Gentile. The term is in contradistinction to the term 
“nationalism,” for example, as used in exposition of a certain 
attitude of the First Evangelist. See above, page 83. In the 
Acts of the Apostles Luke points out the prevalence of the nar- 
rower view in the Jerusalem church and traces the development 
of a real universalism in the ministry of Saint Paul. 

% Acts 17. 26. 


235 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


world-wide spread of his gospel the answer must be 
that in the highest probability it did. His brief 
ministry, however, did not offer him the opportunity 
to teach all that he had in mind.” It was to be 
expected that his followers would carry out: his 
cardinal teaching to its logical conclusion, as light 
dawned upon them. 

As all the evangelists testify, Jesus was at his 
best when teaching and illustrating the real values 
of life. Men, in his view, were immortal, worth 
“‘much more than many sparrows,’*® worth, in fact, 
more than all the world itself. Hence the Master 
rightly urged a consideration of values. “‘What 
can a man give for his soul?” Material and per- 
sonal values, are in reality incommensurable. The 
aim of the genuine disciple would be to develop the 
infinite character values which might lie forever 
undeveloped if the chief interest should be in crops 
and barns or in any sort of wealth that is subject 
to corrupting influences. Yet Jesus taught that his 
disciples should live in the world and take part in 
its activities. They should be real citizens of this 
world and enter rightly into its business and 
pleasures. Jesus’ own contemporaries were sur- 
prised to find him “eating and drinking” and that 
too with all classes of people. 

It was this fine balance between asceticism and 
license, between other-worldliness and commonness 
that aroused the interest of the many who heard 
Jesus gladly. He did not teach them in the way of 

7 This the Fourth Evangelist seems to think of as he records 
Jesus’ saying (16. 12), ‘Still many things have I to say to you, but 
up to the present you are not able to stand them.” 


388 Matt. 10. 31; Luke 12. 7. 
39 Matt. 16. 26; Mark 8. 36; Luke 12. 20. 


236 


THE ETHICS OF JESUS 


their scribes. He was himself. A later follower 
of his urged his readers to “‘use the world as not 
abusing it,” and in this advice Paul caught the 
spirit of his Master’s life. 

All the evangelists make much of the sublime 
appeal to personal religion which Jesus made the 
basis of all right-living. The prayer life of the 
Teacher is the dynamic center of his moral stead- 
fastness. For with the early church the moral 
personality of Jesus was the great force behind his 
moral instruction. In the second generation of 
believers a well-instructed writer testified to the 
sublime fact that Jesus was tempted in every way, 
yet he did not at any point yield to temptation.” 
The person Jesus thus becomes at once the supreme 
sanction and the most effective example of the 
highest and noblest moral teaching ever brought to 
men. The modern student of Jesus’ ethics need 
scarcely ask in what the originality of Jesus con- 
sisted. For the answer is found in the surpassing 
personality of the Teacher himself. He could and 
did repeat many moral truths of the past, but he 
glorified everything he used from that wonderful 
store-house. , There is an intrinsic historical value 
in the words of those who returned from hearing 
the Master and exclaimed, ‘“‘No one ever spoke like 
this man!’*! Jesus spoke appreciatively of the 
insight of the prophets, but when he addressed his 
disciples in the prophets’ very words it seemed to 
them it was with a new authority. In a real sense 
Jesus could not destroy the law or the prophets, 
for they were the Scriptures of his people and their 


“0 Heb. 4. 15. 41 John 7. 46. 
237 


THE ETHICAL TEACHING OF THE GOSPELS 


light was the brightest light on the moral pathway 
possessed by his contemporaries. But the person 
of Jesus in its charm of simplicity, in its force of 
persuasiveness, in its gentle but effective leadership, 
in its wonderful symmetry and depth of under- 
standing—this is the very heart of the ethical 
teaching of Jesus. 


238 





sary 
; 


i (Ah). i : ih 


Tiare Go 





ge © Rae 
ne) y XY, . 


i 








he -canancoimisil MARIUS, 
a y atl La eae a Mon a 
i > oe * 
Ae Re law i & 





aah 


ae 1. 
4 ; Le Y 4 lane 

; ee . % 5. J 
REE 


, L. 
i) : mee rs 
ote Sar aa 
hae 


» 5 


; ee 4 a . 4s 


+ 


Le oy 


hota t , ‘ 
i A bry SUAS at a. 
we 4 af 








